\ 

r 

i 
1 



7.Wf 




PRESENTKD BY 




SERIES OF LETTERS 

ON IMPORTANT 

DOCTRINAL AND PRACTICAL SUBJECTS, 

ADDRESSED TO 

REV. SAMUEL C. AIKIN, 

Pastor of the First Presbyterian Church, in Utica, N. Y. 
TO WHICH ARE ANNEXED 

A BIBIiE CREED AND SIX LETTERS 

To Rev. D.' C. LANSING, D. D., 
Ldie Pastor of the Second Presbyterian Church, in said City, 

ON THE SUBJECT OF 

A COURSE OF LECTURES 

DELIVERED BY HIM 

AGAINST UNIVERSALISM, 
IN WINTER OF 1930. 

BY DOLPHUS SKINNER, 

Pastor of the First Universalis! Ciiurch and Society in Utica. 

*' Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in llie faith; not 
i>iving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men that turn from the truth." 

St. Paul 

SECOND EDITION. 

OFFICE OF EVANGELICAL MAGAZINE AND GOSPEL ADVOCATE. 
A. B. GROSH, PRINTER. 



1833. 



[Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year one thousaut 
eight hundred and thirty-three, by Dolphus Skinner, in the Clerk' 
Office of the District Court of the United States, for the Northern Di.s 
trict of New- York.] 



CONTENTS. 



Page. 



Preface 3 

LETTER I. 

Introductory — Humorous expostulations and admoni- 

Hons, , s . 9 

LETTER II. 

Favorable results of first Letter — Further admoni-^ 
Horn — Brs, Ely and Beecher — American Sunday 
School Union — Unitarianism and Universalism, 13 

LETTERIII. 

Happy omens from first two Letters — Modern revival" 
ists — Messrs. Finney^ Beman, Lansing, Nettletoii^ 
Beecher, Porter, Edwards, and others — Ludicrous 
aspect of the two contending parties of Preshyteri- 
ans at the New-Lebanon Convention, .... 20 

LETTER IV. 

The explanation — Reasons for adopting the style of 
the foregoing Letters — Change of style from the 
humorous to the serious and argumentative. . . 26 

LETTER V. 

On the doctrine of the Fall. 30 

LETTER VI. 

The same subject continued 36 

LETTER VII. 

On the doctrine of Total Depravity 42 

LETTER VIII. 

The same subject continued. 48 

LETTER IX. 

On the doctrine of Election and Reprobation. . . 54 



iv 



CONTENTS. 



LETTER X. 
The same subject continued 60 

LETTER XI. 

On the doctrine of Endless Misery 67 

LETTER XII. 

The same subject continued 76 

LETTER XIII. 

On the doctrine of Fallen Angels and a Personal 
Devil 82 

LETTER XIV. 

The same subject continued 89 

LETTER XV. 

The same subject continued 96 

LETTER XVI. 
On the doctrine of the Trinity 106 

LETTER XVII. 

The same subject continued, 112 

LETTER XVIII. 

On the doctrine of the Atonement 122 

LETTER XIX. 

The same subject continued * . 128 

LETTER XX. 

The same subject continued 135 

LETTER XXI. 
On Presbyterian Infallibility, ^ ...... . 144 

LETTER XXII. 

On Universal Salvation, 150 

LETTER XXIII. 

The same subject continued 156 

LETTER XXIV. 

Concluding Epistle 



CONTENTS. V 
CONTENTS OF LETTERS TO DR. D. C. LANSING. 

A Bible Creed as an Introduction, 177 

LETTER I. 

On the subject of his Lectures against Universalism — 
Misrepresentation — A call for a candid hearing and 
fair treatment, ........... 182 

LETTER II. 

The subject continued — Examination of Matt, xxv : 
46, and its parallels. . 185 

LETTER III, 

Slanderous charges against JJniversalism refuted — Its 
licentious tendency^ its infidelity^ its want of sanc- 
tions^ hypocrisy^ character of females. , . . . 189 

LETTER IV. 

Discussion of Scripture testimony — 1 John iv : 1 ; 
2 Tim. iv : 1-7 ; Mark ix : 43-47, xvi : 16 ; John 
iii: 36; Matt, v: 29, 30 . . 204 

L E T T E R V. 

More charges of inconsistency — Impeachment of Di- 
vine attributes — cases of Noah and Antediluvians, 
Sodom^ Gomorrah^ Corah and his company^ Judas^ 
Infidels^ &c. — David's representation of the righte- 
ous and loicked. . » 212 

LETTER VI. 

Unequal distribution of rewards and 'punishments. 



If present misery is compatible with the goodness 
of God, lohy not endless 1 Tioo characters set forth 
in the Bible — Faith and repentance conditions of 
salvation — How can any one be redeemed from hell ? 
Where shall the ungodly appear ? Responsibility 
of ministers — Ezek. iii : 16-21 ; Mai. ii : 7, 8, 9. — 
Concluding admonition. . 221 



1# 



PREFACE. 



In presenting the second edition of these letters to the public, it 
becomes necessary for the author to state the circumstances under 
which they were first written and published, and the reasons that have 
induced their republication in the present form. 

The letters to Rev. Mr. Aikin were commenced in the Spring of 
1829, finished in the Autumn of 1832, and published along the inter- 
mediate time as they were written, in the third volume (first series) 
of the " Evangelical Magazine" and the three first volumes (new se- 
ries) of the Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate." They 
were commenced under a deep sense of the importance of the sub- 
jects to be discussed — for none can be of greater moment to man than 
these — and the necessity and advantages to the cause of truth, of a 
free and full investigation of the popular doctrines of the day, with the 
firm conviction that when truth and error grapple with each other, 
having ''an open field and fair play," the latter must quail beneath 
the power of the fiirmer, and he who yields to the povver of truth, though 
vanquished, is nevertheless the fortunate man. There appeared also a 
necessity for some work of the kind, that should take up in order, and 
systematically discuss, the leading doctrines of the Presbyterian church, 
and their tendency, and present them in their true light, in contrast 
with those doctrines and principles held by the denomination to which 
the writer belongs, in a manner which is not usually done in the fu- 
gitive and miscellaneous articles that commonly appear in our weekly, 
or periodical publications. It has been the writer's aim thoroughly 
but candidly to pass in review all the peculiar and distinguishing doc- 
trines of Presbyterianism ; to refute, botJi by Scripture and reason, 
whatever appeared therein untrue, incompatible with the character of 
the Deity, or of bad moral tendency in society; and to establish, in 
lieu thereof, a system reflecting the highest possible honor on the cha- 
racter of the former, and exerting the most salutary tendency on the 
lives and happiness of the latter. How far he has succeeded in this 
aim, the reader must judge. 

He regrets that this labor had not been performed by an abler hand, or 
that, falling to his own, he had not possessed leisure and opportunity for 
more critical research during the time the letters were in progress ; and 
that the cares of a family, the duties of his ministry, his parochial avo- 
cations, and editorial and publishing labors, allowed him only oppor- 
tunity of seizing now and then a leisure moment to pursue his design. 



PEEFACJE* 



Vli 



The writer did flatter himself, from the great importance of the doc- 
trines discussed, from the place and station occupied by Mr. Aikin, and 
from the solemn appeal and earnest call made upon him for a reply, that, 
at least, some attempt to answer the letters would be made by the latter, 
or some of his brethren of kindred faith. He hoped for this, if it were 
for no other reason than that the weakness of error might be made to 
appear from the impossibility of its defence. But no such attempt has 
been made ; nor is it now probable there ever will be. Mr. Aikin, 
so far as the public and these letters are concerned, remains silent as 
the house of death. 

It is true that Madam Rumor says — and she is not always mistaken 
in her report — that the question was gravely debated by Mr. Aikin and 
the officers of his church, with some ministering brethren, in secret 
conclave, whether it would be best, or mosi politic, to remain silent on 
the subject, or attempt answering the letters ; and that, by unanimous 
concurrence, it was concluded that silence was by far the safest course 
for Mr. Aikin to pursue — that the moment he should attempt a reply, 
public attention would be called more generally to the subject, the let- 
ters would be read by many who otherwise might never see thern, 
consequently, many more might embrace the doctrine of Universalism, 
and Presbyterians would be the losers instead of the gainers, by such 
notoriety — therefore, the least said, the greater the safety for Mr. Aikin. 
This, no doubt, was the most sage conclusion for those who choose dark- 
ness rather than light, and prefer popular error to unpopular truth. 

In regard to the peculiar style of the first three letters, I have merely 
to refer the reader to the explanation in letter fourth, for the reasons 
inducing me to adopt that style, believing that will satisfy every can- 
did and discriminating mind, of the perfect propriety of the course 
adopted ; and asking the reader not to lay aside the book till he has 
read through the explanation — then, if he does not choose to read fur- 
ther, or is afraid of having his faith in modern Orthodoxy, so called, 
sliaken, he had better lay it aside. 

The reasons inducing me to puhlish a second edition of these letters, 
are, First, A belief that they will be the means of exciting inquiry, and 
leading many to further investigation. Second, The fact that thousand* 
have read a part of the series, who have never seen, and cannot pro- 
cure the whole. During the yearin which the first twelve letters were 
published, there were circulated of the Evangelical Magazine (in which 
they appeared) only about seventeen hundred copies; since which 
lime, and mostly during the progress of these letters, the patronage 
of the paper has increased to seven thousand : and those who have 
the last part of the series are anxious to procure the whole. And, 



Vill 



PREFACE. 



Third, The publication of them in the present form, has been repeat- 
edly and urgently requested and recommended, both by ministering 
and lay brethren, in whose discriminating judgment T place much more 
confidence, in this case, than in my own. Such as they are, I commend 
ihem to the candid and prayerful perusal of all into whose hands they 
may fall, with a sincere and devout desire to Almighty God, that they 
may be instrumental in his hands of overthrowing error, falsehood, 
infidelity and vice, and promoting the spread of Gospel truth, virtue 
and happiness among men. 

The letters to Dr. Lansing are in a style somewhat different from 
any and all of those addressed to Mr. Aikin. The difference of cha- 
racter in the two men, will sufficieatly account for the difference of 
manner in which they are respectively addressed. Dr. Lansing remo- 
ved from Auburn, to this city, in the Fall of 1829, (after the letters to 
Mr. Aikin were commenced.) Having recently adopted the new 
school divinity and the system of revivalism pursued by Mr. Finney ; 
full of the fiery zeal and blind infatuation of a lawless fanaticism, and 
determined to eclipse the glory of all predecessors and rivals in that 
kind of warfare in which he had engaged, he commenced in January. 
1830, a course of lectures, or rather inflammatory harangues, against 
the doctrine of impartial grace, with all the bitterness and acrimony 
with which John Calvin pursued Servetus to the stake. A part of 
these lectures I heard delivered myself, and the rest w^ere faithfully 
reported to me by those who were present. And feeling it a duty to 
rebut his slanderous charges, and expose and refute his sophistical ar- 
guments against the truth, I addressed him the six letters which are 
here annexed. They sufficiently explain themselves and the object of 
the writer, as well as the character of the Doctor, without any further 
comments upon either, in this place. It is proper to inform the reader, 
that these letters were none of them ever ans-wered, nor any attempts 
ever made to answer them, either by Dr. Lansing, or any of his friends. 
The Doctor's popularity, however, instead of being promoted, very 
rapidly declined, and aff;er lingering along till last Autumn, he finally 
took his departure for the city of New- York, \vhere he is now endea- 
voring to organize a band of kindred spirits with his own. 

Many have expressed a strong desire that these letters might be re- 
published in the same volume with the series that precedes them, w^hich 
course I have concluded to adopt. That they may promote the cause 
of truth as it is in Jesus, and be a benefit to others, (even though Iia 
may bo beyond the reach of benefit from the labors of man,) is the fer- 
vent and sincere prayer of The Author. 

Utica, November^ 1833. 



I.ETTEIIS TO REV. S. AIKIF, &€. 



LETTER I, 

Introductory — -Humorous expostulations and admonitions. 

Dear Sir — You will doubtless acknowledge it is the 
duty of every servant and disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ 
to do all the good he can in the world, and, whenever he 
sees any one in a great error, to use his best endeavors to 
reclaim him from that error, and set him in the right path. 
I have long considered it my duty to address you on the 
subject of this letter and those which are to follow: and 
I assure you, dear Sir, I am not without my hopes of be- 
ing the humble instrument, in the hand of God, of convert- 
ing you from the error of your ways, and bringing you to 
a knowledge of that truth which alone can make free in- 
deed. I acknowledge I have a two-fold motive in this 
undertaking — it is not only to reclaim you from dangerous 
and pernicious error, but to enlist your services in the 
cause of truth and righteousness, where, if your eminent 
learning and distinguished talents were properly employed, 
you would do incalculable good, in arresting many other 
deluded souls in their wild and fanatical career, and bring- 
ing them to the knowledge of God and the practice of 
virtue. 

When I picture in the mind's eye, the mighty contrast 
between what you now are, and what you might he, were 
your talents rightly employed; when I reflect that you 
are now a principal leader in the cause of bigotry, intole- 
rance and error, with a vast multitude of souls at your 
heels, who are ready to follow wherever you lead them, 
to believe implicitly whatever you believe, and to do what- 
ever you bid them ; and think of the great good you might 



10 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



be instrumental of doing*, were you to renounce your errors, 
embrace the truth, and gently lead those many souls into 
the green pastures of peace, and unto the side of still wa- 
ters — when I reflect on these things, I say, I do assure 
you, dear Sir, my heart is filled with the various emotions 
of pain and pleasure — as the thirsty soul pants for water, 
even so do I ardently desire and pray for your conversion. 
I feel the more encouraged to hope for this happy change 
in you, from the consideration that you are a man of ta- 
lents and discrimination. That you are both discrimina- 
ting and talented, every one must acknowledge, after wit- 
nessing the adroitness of your management during, and 
after, the violent raging of the Finney fever in this city, 
three years ago. For at that time, 

When civil dudgeon first grew high, 

And men fell out, they knew not why ; 

When hard words, jealousies, and fears, 

Set folks together by the ears, 

And made them fight, iike mad or drunk, 

For dame Religion as for punk ; 

Whose honesty they all durst swear for, 

Tho' not a man of them knew wherefor:'* 

at that time, I say, very few, even of your warmest friends* 
believed you could so manage as to let down the people of 
your charge from that supernatural elevation to which they 
had been raised, without their being either " dashed to 
pieces on the ground," or falling through, and continued to 

descend, " down, down, ," like Milton's devil when 

hurled from the battlements of heaven. But to the aston- 
ishment of all, you let them down very gently, with the 
loss of but few souls. You so perfectly understood the 
nature of the disease, that you managed them with uncom- 
mon skill — when the ardor of the fever began to abate, 
your friendship for Mr. Finney and his measures began to 
cool, (at least the public expression of it,) and continued 
to decrease in exact ratio to the subsiding of the excite- 
ment ; and you very shortly found yourself peaceably oc- 
cupying your old ground, with a great many more young 
men and women, or boys and girls, (particularly the lat- 
ter,) at your command, than you had before. Thus, your 
success must have been owing to your superior skill in the 
management of such an affair. For I know not of a sin- 
gle case beside your own, in which any minister has con- 
curred wjth Mr. Finney in getting up an excitement of thi?^ 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



11 



kind, in which he has not ahnost, if not entirely, lost his 
popularity, both with professors and non-professors of re- 
ligion. 

I must, however, caution you, dear Sir, against being 
vain, or puffed up with pride, at your success in this case : 
for the same scene will not bear to be reacted in the city 
of Utica for many years — certainly not during your life 
time, if ever. As the Grecian king said, after obtaining a 
slight victory over the Roman General, " another such vic- 
tory would ruin me," so you may rest assured that another 
such an excitement as that to which I allude would ruin 
you : i. e. unless you should be converted, and embrace 
the truth, and so lead your flock into a better pasture than 
they have ever yet fed in. For the time is approaching, yea, 
it has already arrived, when people will think for them- 
selves, and see through the artful management that has so 
long been employed to keep them in bondage. A numer- 
ous society of believers in the unity, and impartial and 
universal benevolence of God, is springing up in this 
place, and daily increasing in numbers and strength. And 
what is still more encouraging to us, is, that our meetings 
on Sunday, for public worship, are not only fully attended 
by respectable people, but even by many of your own so- 
ciety and church ; which shows they have a relish for the 
truth, and would gladly hear the Gospel preached by you, 
if you only understood it. It also proves, clear as de- 
monstration, that the people generally are arousing from 
their lethargy to see and embrace the joyful tidings of a 
world's salvation, and will no longer receive the dogmas, 
which you are pleased to call orthodox, as the truth. — 
These things should admonish you to serious and prayer- 
ful reflection, and to " examine your own self, whether you 
be in the faith." 

As a preparatory measure to your conversion, I advise 
you to break ofl" all connexion and intercourse with Josiah 
Bissell, Jr., of Rochester. For he is really, in my opin- 
ion, too despicable and scandalous a character for any man 
of reputation, honor, or standing in society, to have any 
communion or intercourse with, whatever. True, he pro- 
fesses a great deal of piety — so did the ancient hypocrites — 
but I do not believe he possesses one spark of vital religion, 
the religion of Jesus. And I candidly believe his mad 
career will end in disgrace to himself and all who continue 



12 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



eonnected with him. He certainly out-Herods Herod i"^ 
why, Mr. Finney is a fool to him, as to brow-beating, pro- 
scription, money-begging, stage-running, &;c., &c. I do 
really hope, dear Sir, for the honor of your name, that you 
have had no hand in encouraging or countenancing, in any 
shape or manner, the late ebullitions of his spleen and holy 
wrath against Senator Johnson's Report on Sunday Mails, 
and those political Editors who have accorded with him 
in opinion on that subject — in which he scandalously as- 
sociates Col. Johnson's name with the names of Thomas 
Paine and Frances Wright, and shamelessly denounces 
those Editors who approved of the Report as ^' Infidels, 
enemies to religion," &c., when it is well known that Sena- 
tor Johnson is a pious and devoted member of the Baptist 
communion, and in that Report, conformed strictly to the 
letter and spirit of the Constitution of the United States. 
Whether you were one of his counsellors, when he was 
last in this place, and addressed that scandalous produc- 
tion to the Editor of the " Sentinel and Gazette," that ap- 
peared in that paper of the 24th ult., I do not pretend to 
say — I hope not. For if you were, I should hardly be 
willing to acknowledge and confide in you as a brother, 
even after you shall have embraced the truth ; fearing lest 
the influence of former associates might draw you back 
again to the beggarly elements of the world. 

Whether, with Mr. Bissell, you hold the purse-strings 
of any of the nominally benevolent institutions of this 
country — branches of the Bible Society," " Missionary 
Society," " Tract Society," " American Union for the sanc- 
tification of the Sabbath," &;c. — I cannot say. I hope you 
do not : because if you do, I fear that silver will possess 



* T had designed in this edition to leave out the name of Mr. Bis- 
sell, and consequently the whole of this paragraph, on account of the 
death of that distinguished leader of Finneyism and Pioneerism in 
Western New-York, which occurred some time since this letter was 
written. But on farther consideration, and taking advice from my 
friends on the subject, have concluded to make no alteration, either in 
this or any other particular. For 1. the picture drawn, I believe is 
true to the life, as far as it goes. And 2. though probably the equal 
of this individual lives not now, yet there are many who still aspire 
at the kind of distinction he sought, and copy after him so far as their 
abilities allow : therefore the same necessity exists now, as then, for 
holding up the beacon light to give warning of the danger. Though 
he is gone, (peace to his ashes,) yet others live in his place. 



LETTERS TO S. C. AIKIN. 



13 



so great a charm in your eyes, that it will greatly retard? 
if not entirely prevent, your conversion. 

I intended in this letter to have given you some other 
admonitions, particularly against yielding to the influence 
of popular names so far as to continue any longer subser- 
vient to Doctor Ely's electioneering, and Church-and- 
State-uniting schemes, or following the example of Doctor 
Beecher, at the East, v^ho has lately fallen, I fear, no more 
to rise. But I have already exceeded the limits of what I 
intended merely as an introductory letter, and shall reserve 
these things for a future number. In the mean time, I 
assure you, dear Sir, I shall not forget you, but shall pray 
fervently, night and day, that God, in his infinite mercy, 
may open the eyes of your understanding, enable you to 
see the truth as it is in Jesus Christ our Lord, and em- 
brace it to the unspeakable joy of your and my souls. 

I am, dear Sir, very respectfully and affectionately. 

Yours in the bonds of the Gospel 



LETTER II. 

Favorable results of the first Letter — Further admonitiom 
— Doctors Ely and Beecher — American Sunday School 
Union — Unitarianism and Universalism, 

Dear Sir — I again resume the delightful duty of ad- 
dressing you on the all-important subject of your con- 
version, and would here observe that my hopes of success 
in this arduous undertaking have been greatly strength- 
ened since I wrote my introductory letter. Indeed, that 
letter was far more successful than I could rationally have 
anticipated, under existing circumstances. For it had the 
effect to make many of your most devoted followers, and 
some of the leading Finneyites " exceedingly mad:" and 
this you know is with your great prototype, Mr. Finney, a 
sure prelude to conversion ; so that I have strong hopes 
(not of you only, but) of the conversion of the principal 
and leading members of your church. For who can doubt. 

2 



14 



LETTERS TO S. C. AIKIN. 



from your brother Finney's extensive acquaintance with 
human nature, the correctness of his judgment as to the 
symptoms of conversion 1 or that he is right, when he cal- 
culates that if he can get people ungovernably wrathy, so 
that they will say and do things for which they will feel 
guilt and remorse of conscience, he can then urge success- 
fully the doctrine of total depravity, persuade them that 
their anger proceeded from the natural corruptions of 
their hearts" and their " enmity to God and religion," and 
thus spread his net over and convert them ? And now, 
dear Sir, who can tell but that these same members of your 
church, who are so angry just before their conversion, will, 
when they come to knoio ^nd feel the power of divine truth 
in their hearts y render me great and incalculable service in 
my benevolent undertaking, and thus greatly accelerate 
the conversion of their present much loved pastor? For 
I cannot believe you will have the hardihood to stand out 
a great while, or be very stout-hearted against the truth, 
after all of your principal supporters shall have left their 
seats in your church for want of the "bread of life," and 
begin to admonish you to forsake a system as rotten as 
yours is, which although " it may do to live by, will not 
answer to die by." 

But really, dear Sir, it is somewhat surprising that your 
friends should any of them have got so indignant at me, 
(however much good may result from it,) merely for un- 
dertaking to effect your conversion, in the way I have. — 
For surely nothing unfriendly — nothing but what breathed 
the most entire good will and benevolence to you — w^as 
manifested in my first letter ; nor do I intend any thing in 
this or any future number that shall indicate a want of the 
most pure and disinterested friendship. Why, my dear 
Sir, your friends were generally very much pleased with 
your conversion three years ago, under Mr. Finney; and 
why should they be c^i^pleased with a prospect of a simi- 
lar event noio ? for surely it must be full as desirable now 
as then. When you and Dr. Lansing, of Auburn, and 
several other Orthodox clergymen in this region, after 
having preached and been settled pastors of churches, ten, 
fifteen, or twenty years, confessed (as I have been told you 
did) that you "had never been converted — had never 
known what true religion was till brother Finney can^ 



LETTERS TO S. C. AIKIN. 



15 



along, expounded the way more perfectly unto you, and 
brought you to feel yourselves, for the first time, the hap- 
py subjects of renewing grace," or words to that effect; 
your warmest friends were well pleased, and said one to 
another, " then hath God granted to our beloved pastor 
also repentance unto life." And yet, now, strange as it 
may seem, those very friends appear to be afraid of your 
being converted a second time ! By the way, I would ob- 
serve, you ought to be very modest in your pretensions, 
and very diffident of your judgment as to the genuineness 
of your conversion under Mr. Finney: for if you preach- 
ed fifteen years, or more, under the deceptive impression 
that you had been converted to the knowledge of the truth, 
and afterwards discovered that you had not, but had been 
deceived all this time, you ought not to be very sanguine 
in the opinion that your last conversion was not likewise 
spurious. I am as well satisfied that it was, and that you 
need another conversion, as I am that you are pastor of the 
First Presbyterian church in the city of Utica. And 
as soon as I can get you to begin to distrust the genuine- 
ness of that conversion, I shall think myself in a fairway 
of soon obtaining my object. 

I will now attend to what I promised in my first letter, 
viz. to give you some advice and admonitions against 
yielding to the influence of popular names, such as those 
of Drs. Ely, Beecher and others, in endeavoring to obtain 
objects beyond your reach, or which, if attained, would be 
most disastrous in their consequences. Now, friend Aikin, 
were you really in league with Dr. Ely, in endeavoring to 
prepare and incite the public mind for the union of Church 
and State? and were you and he the appointed organs of 
your party to communicate the scheme to the public, simul- 
taneously, he in Philadelphia, and you in Utica? Your 
language and his, used on the 4th of July, 1827, are so 
perfectly synonymous that it would induce the belief, (if 
you were not above suspicion,) that it was a preconcerted 
plan between you, to take that time to prepare the public 
mind for the event above named. You and he both seem 
to put great confidence in Sunday Schools, as efficient 
means of accomplishing your purposes. And it must be 
acknowledged, such is the human mind, that, generally, 
*' just as the twig is bent the tree's inclined;" so that in 



16 



LETTERS TO S. C. AIKIN* 



this you discovered considerable foresight. You say you 
" have been surprised to see the apathy of our enlightened 
statesmen on the subject of Sunday Schools; surprised 
that they look upon them only as religious institutions, 
when it is so plain that their political energy must very 
soon, if it increases with the same ratio it has for fifteen 
years past, totally regenerate our Legislatures and the very 
halls of Congress.^^ You, however, seem rather to rejoice 
in this apathy, and to exult in the certainty of success in 
your plans by its existence among enlightened statesmen. 
(Of course " enlightened statesmen" would oppose you.) 
You say " in such cases it is well that this blind apathy 
exists, for instead of it, there might have been opposition : 
but it is now too late to oppose. It has been wisely order- 
ed by divine Providence that this little rivulet should 
silently flow along until it has acquired the strength and 
majesty of the ocean." It is not difficult to determine 
what is meant by the ''^regeneration'^ of our Legislatures 
and halls of Congress^ even from your own statements. — 
But the designs of your party are rendered, if possible, 
still more indubitable by the Philadelphian Doctor. 

Dr. Ely says, " I propose, fellow-citizens, a new sort of 

union, or if you please, a Christian party in politics 

I am free to avow that, other things being equal, I would 
prefer for my Chief Magistrate, and Judge, and Ruler, a 

sound Presbyterian.,. Our Presidents, Secretaries of 

Government, Senators, Representatives in Congress, Go- 
vernors of States, Judges, State Legislators, Justices of 
the Peace, and city Magistrates, are just as much bound 
as any other persons in the United States, to be Ortho- 
dox in their faith The Freshyterians alone could 

bring half a million of electors into the field The 

electors of these five classes (of Orthodox sects named) 
united in the sole requisition of apparent friendship to 
Christianity in every candidate for office whom they will 
support, could govern every public electionin our country, 
It will be objected that my plan of a truly Chris- 
tian party in politics^ will make hypocrites. We are 
not answerable for their hypocrisy, if it does." Again 
he says in an appendix to his report of the American Sun- 
day School Union : — " In ten years, or certainly i7i twen- 
ty ^ the political power of our country would be in the hands 



LETTERS TO S. C. AIKIN. 17 

of men whose characters have been formed under the influ' 
ence of Sabbath Schools 

Thus you and Dr. Ely seem to anticipate glorious times 
when your " Christian party in politics" shall come into 
power and " totally regenerate our Legislatures and the 
very halls of Congress when the salutary restraints of 
an Orthodox Inquisition shall compel all to become " sound 

Presbyterians" or "hypocrites," and but I forbear— 

the picture is too revolting to dwell on. 0, for shame> 
friend Aikin! Can you and the Doctor be so foolish as to 
think of making all of the intelligent and enlightened peo- 
ple in this country " sound Presbyterians^' ? or even of 
bringing them so near it as to make them all " hypocrites''^ ? 
If you are, I sincerely pity you. But pause a moment, 
dear Sir, while I ask you, if it is not barely possible that 
you are deceived and blinded by the love of popularity and 
the influence of great names? Suppose you should suc- 
ceed in your undertaking — of which I think there is but 
very little prospect — but suppose you should, are you cer- 
tain you would not afterwards repent of it? You have 
children— suppose after you had succeeded in getting an 
Inquisition established in this country, with all the appen- 
dages of terror and torture that ever characterized that 
dreadful engine of priestly power in Spain, that you should 
discover, in your old age, that one of your own children 
had renounced the barbarous dogmas of your creed, and 
embraced the mild and benevolent religion of the Gospel, 
the belief that " God is the Saviour of all men," " good 
unto all, and his tender mercies over all his works," and in 
consequence should have to feel the tortures of that dread- 
ful engine — what, I ask, would be your feelings as a father? 
Would they not be indescribable 1 Would not the sight, 
with the refleccion that you had been instrumental, how- 
ever unwittingly, in paving the way for his sufferings, 
bring down your gray hairs with sorrow to the grave ? 
Such things, Sir, are not impossible, nor, indeed improba- 
ble, if you and Dr. Ely should succeed ; for I have often 
known the sons of Orthodox clergymen (and I apprehend 
the instances will be more frequent hereafter than they 
have ever yet been) to embrace the truth as it is in Jesus, 
and come out boldly in vindication of the doctrine of uni- 
versal salvation. 

2# 



18 



LETTERS TO S. C. AIKIN. 



A few words in reference to Dr. Beecher, to whose case 
I have before adverted. Though he seems to oppose you 
and your brothers Finney and Ely in some things, yet the 
discerning part of community can discover that he is vir- 
tually seeking the same object ; though he has had art and 
cunning enough about him, till of late, to keep his designs 
covered from the generality of the people. While he pub- 
licly declaims against the union of Church and State, say- 
ing, " let there be no favoritism of the civil power for one 
denomination of Christians against another, or for one error 
against another, or for error against the truth, or for truth 
against error. An open field and fair play is all we ask." 
Yet this same Dr. Beecher (if the report be true, as I con- 
clude it is, that he wrote the "Eeview" of Col. Johnson's 
Report in the Senate on Sunday Mails, which first appear- 
ed in the " Spirit of the Pilgrims," and has since been re- 
published in this city) now comes out in the most bitter 
vituperation against the Senate of the United States for 
refusing to become sectarian partisans, and uniting with 
him and his coadjutors, in the legal support of (what he 
calls) " truth against error.'' Though he would'doubtless 
disclaim this motive, yet I think it too apparent, through 
the whole of his Review, to be doubted for one moment. 
In this, as well as other late productions from him, Dr. 
Beecher discovers that he is not a whit behind the very 
chiefest of you, in the Church-and-State-uniting project. 

In regard to TJnitarianism and Universalism, Dr. Beech- 
er has called into requisition his " giant powers," and 
thought to put them down, sans ceremonie) but he has 
completely failed, and fallen into a pit so deep it is impos- 
sible for him to extricate himself w^ithout help ; and I doubt 
very much whether he can be helped out. When the 
Unitarians of Boston charged the doctrine of infant dam- 
nation home to its legitimate parent, Calvinism, the Doc- 
tor came out in great wrath, denounced them as calumnia- 
tors, and boldly denied that it is, or ever was, a doctrine 
of Calvinism. The Unitarians then adduced innumera- 
ble testimonies from the writings of Calvin himself, and 
all his most eminent followers, proving incontestibly that 
" infant damnation" was an essential and fundamental 
doctrine of Calvinism, and brought home to the Doctor the 
charge of criminal ignorance or wilful falsehood, so well 



LETTERS TO S. C. AlKIN. 



19 



sustained, that he is now in such a quandary he hardlj 
knows which end is uppermost. Little more than a year 
since, the Doctor delivered a course of lectures against 
TJniversalism, which he promised publicly should appear 
from the press : Universalists waited a suitable time with 
fond expectation of seeing him redeem his promise ; but 
they waited in vain. They have of late repeatedly called 
for their publication, but he still declines, and is " silent 
as the house of death" on the subject. — Last Fall Mr. Bal- 
four was present when Dr. Beecher delivered a discourse 
on the Rich man and Lazarus," in which he made state- 
ments concerning the word rendered hell in that passage, 
of which he was totally and inexcusably ignorant ; or else 
(what is worse) he meant to state what was false. Mr. 
Balfour called on him for a copy of the sermon, offered 
him a handsome compensation for it, and Mr. Whittemore 
offered to publish one thousand copies of it for gratuitous 
distribution, if he would consent to its publication. But no : 
he dare not let his ideas and statements be put in print and 
spread out before the eye of an enlightened public. So 
that after all his clamor and threats against liberal Chris* 
tians, the Doctor is himself fairly doivn, and I would here 
admonish you against falling into his errors, lest you 
should share his fate.^ 

There are some other things in regard to Dr. Beecher, 
Mr. Nettleton, Mr. Beman, of Troy, Mr. Finney and 
yourself, that I designed to have noticed, for your benefit, 
in this letter ; but want of time and room compels me to 
omit them till a future number. In the mean time, dear 
Sir, I entreat you to think and meditate on what I have 
said. " Quench not the spirit — Despise not prophesy- 
ings." With respect and affection, I am Yours, &c. 

P. S. — I shall hereafter satisfactorily explain to you 
my reasons for adopting the particular style that I have 
in these letters. I would have done it in this, but I ap- 
prehend a number of your friends (if not indeed yourself) 
are " under conviction and fear it would check the work 
of grace in their hearts before it should be thoroughly ac- 
fomplished ; knowing that " the wrath of man shall praise'' 
the Lord, " and the remainder of wrath he will restrain." 



* The Doctor has since left Boston and removed to the West. 



LETTER III. 



Happy omens from first two Letters — Modern revivalists- — 
Messrs, Finney^ Beman, Lansing, Nettleton, Beecher, 
Porter, Edivards, and others — Ludicrous aspect of the 
two contending parties of Presbyterians at the Neiv- 
Lebanon Convention, 

Dear Sir — Every step I take in my labor with you 
seems to give additional promise of final success, and en- 
courages me to persevere in my undertaking. " To write 
the same things to you, to me indeed is not grievous, but 
for you it is profitable." I am informed that you announ- 
ced from your pulpit, on the Sabbath after my second epistle 
reached you, that it did " not belong to your creed to make 
people mad, in order to convert them." This augurs 
well. I am heartily glad that you have renounced this 
objectionable part of your creed. Indeed, I did not expect 
you would renounce the tvhole of it at once. But if you 
lop ofi" one article after another — and those the most re- 
volting — of your present system, though the work progress 
but slowly, it will be sure, and your entire conversion in- 
evitable. 

To aid you in detecting, and encourage you to reject, 
other monstrous features in your system of faith and prac- 
tice, (I mean that adopted by modern revivalists of your 
class generally,) I will now call your attention to what 
I promised in the closing paragraph of my last letter — to 
the raging of the Finney fever, the manoeuvres practiced 
by him and his coadjutors, (in which you took so active a 
part,) being supported in the new measures by Messrs. 
Benian, Lansing, and others ; and the opposition made 
to your party by Messrs. Nettleton, Beecher, Porter, Ed- 
wards and others, when they discovered such a fire kind- 
ling as was likely to burn down your house. To describe 
fully the hubbub wild and sad confusion all" in which 
the Presbyterians were involved by those scenes, and 
from which they have not yet extricated themselves, I 
shall not attempt : bat shall merely glance at some of the 
principal events, in order to draw from them a suitable 



LETTERS TO S. C. AIKIN. 



21 



admonition to you to abandon so ridiculous a system of 
measures and doctrines as your party have adopted. 

Mr. Nettleton had long been a celebrated revival preach- 
er—had produced many and great excitements, practiced 
many extravagant feats, and driven many, through the 
fear of hell, \o profess religion, and join the Presbyterian 
church ; and so long as he had art and management enough 
about him, to dupe community, and make people believe 
his labors were evangelical, and proceeded wholly from 
his love of souls ^ and not from any sectarian and prosely- 
ting disposition, he was allowed to take the lead, and your 
denomination very generally approbated his course, and 
considered him an excellent recruiting officer, even though 
he might write letters and sign them " Jesus Christ V — 
At length Mr. Finney comes on to the stage — raised from 
obscurity, and (to say nothing of his private character, or 
domestic affairs, with which I have no concern) as impu- 
dent as he was ignorant, he begins to make a great noise, 
thunders away with his anathemas against all -who will 
not bow and do him reverence, terrifies weak-minded wo- 
men and children half out of their senses, and from the 
multitudes that he succeeds in scaring into the church, by 
his appeals to their passions, his descriptions of hell, and 
his imagery of the infernal regions, (with which he seems 
to be very familiar,) at once concludes he can out-general 
Mr. Nettleton; and by the course he pursues, seems to say 
to the latter, "Brother Nettleton, you've been Captain 
long enough ; 'tis my turn now." Shortly after thfs, he as- 
sumes the office and authority of Brigadier General, and 
marshals under his command several scores of Aids-de- 
camp, v^^ho, eager to execute the orders and imitate the 
example of their General, go forth in swarms, like locusts, 
upon the breadth of the land, threatening to devour every 
green thing. Among them we see a Nash and a Smith, 
a Myrick and a Sly, a Boyle and a Snyder, and a whole 
clan of others of a similar cast, too numerous to name ; 
who in their endeavors to ape Mr. Finney, "remind us (as 
Mr. Nettleton says in his letter to you) of the seven sons 
of Sceva who undertook to imitate Paul." (Acts xix.) I 
had like to have added to the above named imitators of 
Mr. Finney, the names of Brs. Aikin, and Beman, and 
Lansing, But on a second thought, it occurred to me that 



LETTERS TO S. C. AIKIN. 



they possibly might have been infiaenced in their course 
by somewhat different motives. Indeed it appears from 
Mr. Beman's confession to some of his confidential friends, 
that his motive in adopting the new measures and getting 
up an excitement in Troy, was, to divert the public atten- 
tion of the people in that city from the subject of his ov/n 
domestic broils and private character. Whether the mo- 
tive of yourself and Mr. Lansing in adopting these mea- 
sures and getting converted again, was simplj^ to make 
proselytes to your creed, and additions to your churches, or 
embraced other objects, I shall not here pretend to deter- 
mine. 

When Mr. Finney and his co-w^orkers and imitators, in 
this place and Troy, began to make such a tremendous 
noise, by bringing into the field their heaviest artillery, and 
to raise such volumes of smoke as wholly to obscure the 
mental horizon — when the people in this place, filled with 
consternation at the incessant firing that was kept up, for- 
sook their domestic duties and daily avocations and ran 
like madmen through the streets, holding prayer meetings 
from shop to shop, and even in the midst of the streets, 
and insulting every civil man, w^oman and child they met 
— Mr. Nettleton and Dr. Beecher, hearing what wonderful 
things were done by Mr. Finney and Mr. Aikin and Mr. 
Beman, found themselves fairly outdone and placed on 
the back ground. This they could not easily brook. And 
indeed it could hardly be expected that they would readily 
yield the^pahn to younger men than themselves, w^ien 
they had always been foremost in revival scenes, in get- 
ting up and managing great popular excitements. Some- 
thing must be done, and that immediately, or Mr. Finney 
and his revivals would soon eclipse all the glory of their 
own brilliant career. Accordingly Mr. Nettleton sits down 
and writes a long letter to yourself ; and Dr. Beecher, ano- 
ther to Mr. Beman, complaining in the bitterest terms of 
the abuses and arts practised by Mr. Finney and his coad^ 
jutors, in the revivals just got up, calling them " powerful 
and successful assaults of satan," spreading "universal 
misrule and moral desolation'' through the land, " fires that 
would ruin fences and gardens and houses, and burn up 
friends &c., stating that somebody must speak" out 
against them, " for silence would prove their ruin." These 



LETTERS TO S. C. AIKIN. 



23 



letters, together with the confidential correspondence be- 
tween Dr. Beecher and Mr. Nettleton, soon creep into the 
public prints, and produce a general confusion throughout 
all your ranks. Two great parties are formed — one accu- 
ses the other of being enthusiasts, disorganizers, deran- 
ged and mad and they in their turn retort the accusation 
against their accusers, of being " cold, stupid, dead, uncon- 
verted, and enemies to revivals," and thus mutual accusa- 
tions and recriminations go the rounds. Till at length, no 
other way appearing, to allay the increasing fury of the 
storm, a Convention, or ecclesiastical Council, of both par- 
ties, is called together at New-Lebanon. There, face to 
face, the two contending parties meet, to settle their ani- 
mosities, restore peace, and determine — not how they 
should he governed by the Holy Spirit— but how they should 
govern the Holy Ghost ! But what a total abortion was 
here ! and what a ridiculous figure does this Convention 
make in the records of your ecclesiastical proceedings ! 
Your party, with their leading officers, Messrs. Finney, 
Beman and Lansing, introduced their propositions and 
resolutions, and through the sullen silence and inaction of 
the Beecher and Nettleton party, were allowed to carry 
them. Then the other party introduce theirs of entirely 
opposite import, and through the same silence and inaction 
on your part, are allowed to carry their resolutions ; so 
that both parties gain the victory, and yet, strange to tell, 
both parties are defeated ! The resolutions of your party 
were designed to show that the Beecher party were not 
actuated by the Holy Spirit in their movements ; and the 
resolutions of the latter were designed to show that the 
Finney party were not actuated by the Holy Spirit in their 
movements. And I must exercise charity enough to be- 
lieve that so far at least, the resolutions of both parties 
were correct. The two parties not coming to any agree- 
ment about governing^ or being governed by^ the Holy 
Spirit, in revival seasons, at length separated more cha- 
grined and disgusted with each other than before. Here 
the matter could not rest ; for neither party were satisfied. 
Shortly after this. Dr. Beecher delivered his famous die- 
course in New- York, entitled, Resources of the Adversary 
and means of their destruction in which, speaking of 
corrupting revivals^ he very kindly intimated that many 



24 



LETTERS TO S. C. AIKIN. 



of his brethren were instruments of the devil, in getting 
up and managing revivals as they did. 

At length, seeing no end of these contentions, accusa- 
tions and recriminations, and conceiving the craft in great 
danger, a few of the " master spirits" meet together in 
Philadelphia, and after free conversation on the subject of 
revivals, in relation to those points wherein they differed, 
they agree to cease from all publications, correspondences, 
conversations and conduct, designed or calculated to keep 
those subjects before the public mind. Yes, they solemnly 
obligate themselves to keep those subjects from before the 
public mind, which, if your views be correct, are of all 
subjects the most important to be kept constantly in view ! 

Now, dear Sir, in view of all these things, these strange 
movements, these popular excitements, these wild fires of 
Finneyism, these ecclesiastical contentions among the ad- 
vocates of revivals themselves, and the fruits of them from 
beginning to end, can you seriously and honestly believe 
they are all, or indeed any of them, the work of God, the 
operation of his spirit, or in any way entitled to your lon- 
ger friendship or countenance ? Do they not appear to be 
wholly the work of crafty, designing men, got up and car- 
ried on from interested motives, with a design of increasing 
the power and influence of the clergy, and christened, " the 
work of the Lord^^^ to make them take with the ignorant 
and weak-minded, and to add new recruits to your church ? 
What resemblance, what connexion, is there between such 
ridiculous scenes, and measures, and principles, as are de- 
scribed above, and the labors of the primitive disciples and 
the principles of the mild and peace-giving religion of Jesus 1 

Presuming that, if you are not given over to " hardness 
of heart and blindness of mind," you must be under con- 
viction yourself by this time, I recomniend to you to exer- 
cise yourself much in secret and ^fervent prayer to God, 
till I write you again, that he may open the eyes of your 
understanding, deliver you from the power of darkness, 
and show you his salvation. In my next I shall give you 
the explanation promised in the postscript of my second 
letter. Affectionately Yours. 



LETTER IV. 



TChe Explanation — Reasons for adopting the style of the 
foregoing Letters—Change of style from the humorous 
to the serious and argumentative. 

Dear Sir^ — Having arrived, in the course of my labor 
with you, to that stage at v^hich it will be both proper and 
safe to relieve you of that awful uncertainty, that, on truly 
orthodox principles, always accompanies conviction and 
precedes conversion, I shall now redeem my pledge, and 
give you the promised explanation of my reasons for adopt- 
ing the particular style that I have done in these commu- 
nications. Doubtless you and your friends, and perhaps 
some of rny own friends, have thought it strange and un- 
accountable that I should have travelled so far out of my 
usual path, and adopted a style so uncommon with theo- 
logical writers generally, and indeed so uncommon with 
myself, in your case. You may have taken offence, and 
under the influence of indignant feelings and a misappre- 
hension of my real motives, have attributed it either to 
enmity against yourself, or a levity of disposition, or an 
intention to reproach the cause of Christianity, and ridi- 
cule religion. But I assure you, dear Sir, my motives have 
been directly the reverse of these things. True, my style 
has been, thus far, uncommon, even to myself ; but the 
case is likewise sufliciently uncommon to j ustify it. I hare 
endeavored, as far as possible, to adapt my style to the case 
in hand. My object has been — 

1. To present you loith a mirror in which you might see 
yourself In the style of yourself and those of your pe- 
culiar stamp, I have assumed — without any effort to prove 
by argument — -that / am right and you are lorong ; or that 
my doctrine is true, and your^s false. You are in the con- 
stant habit of begging the question at issue between CaJ- 
vinists and Univetsalists : And your arrogant assumption 
of the truth of your doctrine, is only equalled by youx 
affected contempt of the views of others who may honestly 
differ from you, and your manner of treating them as the 
most palpable falsehoods, without giving yourself the trow- 



86 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



ble of proving them such. You speak of and to Univer- 
salists as irreligious, unconverted, and indeed, unbelieving 
people, and talk about their being conv^erted to the faith of 
the Gospel, as though they, while professing to believe in 
universal salvation, made no pretensions, and had no claim, 
to the name and character of Christians. And notwith- 
standing many Calvinists in this place are almost outrage- 
ous with me for addressing you as an unbeliever and un- 
converted, (forgetting that it is in your own style,) yet they 
would, no doubt, approve of the very same thing in you — 
that is, should you undertake to convert me from what you 
deem the error of my ways — and would consider it an 
evidence of your being a true Christian, filled with the love 
of souls, and zealously engaged in the work of evangeli- 
zation. " Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that 
thing w^hich he alloweth." If the mirror I have presented 
you with, reflects this trait of your character in so clear a 
light that you have a full and fair view of it, my object, 
thus far, is accomplished. 

2. Although I have adopted your own style, so far as 
was necessary for the above pu'rpose, yet as my creed 
(which is founded on the Bible) will not allov,^ me to sen- 
tence you to an endless hell, burning with fire and brim- 
stone, for an error in theory or practice, I have supplied 
the deficiency in that with a little pleasantry. And indeed 
I was perfectly willing to be relieved from the necessity of 
adopting that particular trait in your style which consists 
in damnatory sentences. For had 1 adopted this, I appre- 
hend my communications would, at first view, have appear- 
ed so revolting, they would have been read but by few, 
either of your or my friends. I have occasionally inter- 
woven into my former letters an expression of satirical 
pleasantry, not only to supply the above deficiency, but 

3. To present your movements in conjunction with Mr. 
Finney and Co., in their truhj ridiculous light, that you 
might justly feel ashamed of having espoused so warmly, 
a system of measures so ludicrous in themselves, and in 
their details and consequences so destructive to the peace, 
harmony and good order of society — which have broken 
through all the ties of friendship and domestic union, out- 
raged humanity, driven timid and weak minds to despair 
or insanity, and excited the scoffs and sneers of infidels more 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



effectually than all the writings of Paine, Voltaire, Volney, 
and the whole catalogue of infidel writers that could be 
named. It was a subject of some deliberation in my mind 
whether the course I have adopted were the right course 
to take with you to induce you to abandon a system of 
measures so prolific of mischief in society. But I am now 
satisfied it is the best course that could have been adopted ; 
though I would gladly have avoided it — as it is not suited 
either to my taste or talents — and adopted a different one, 
could I have been persuaded it would prove equally effica- 
cious. But there are certain follies and extravagan-ces in 
the religious world that men will not be persuaded nor 
driven from in any other way than that of being fairly 
laughed out of them, or by the application of satire, or 
irony; as we find the latter employed by the prophet Eli- 
jah, who mocked" the false prophets of Baal, saying, 
" Cry aloud for he is a god, either he is talking, or he is 
pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleep- 
eth and must be awaked." Indeed, could serious argu- 
Knents and solemn appeals to your dispassionate reason 
have induced you to abandon those extravagant follies, you 
would long since have yielded to the cool and deliberate 
judgments of Drs. Porter, Hyde, Emmons, Blachford, and 
others of your own order, who have raised their voices 
against them ; and would have abandoned Mr. Finney and 
his hot-headed subalterns, to reap the fruits of their own 
folly, till they shall learn that the kingdom of heaven is 
not to be taken by storm. But instead of that, we find you 
still striving to keep up appearances, produce feverish ex- 
citements, and when a new project is on foot that you dare 
not put forward in propria persona for fear of exciting the 
enmity of your ablest supporters, you are foisting such 
men as the " deceived and deceiving" Josiah Bissell, jr. 
into your desk, to do it for you ! 

Should you feel disposed to complain of my being too 
severe upon you, or exaggerating any of my representa- 
tions of your follies, my reply is, in the language of 
the queen of Sheba, " The one-half has not been told." 
Indeed, I have not attempted to enter into details — I 
have merely glanced at some of the outlines, or leading 
features, of the picture. It would be difficult, if not im- 
possible, to run into an extreme in the description of theist 



28 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



things. So far from having exceeded the boundaries of 
truth in reference to the extravagances and follies of your- 
self, and Messrs. Finney, Beman, Lansing, &c., I have 
not gone near as far, either in my description of, or severity 
upon them, as your own brethren have, whose letters are 
spread out before the public. 

Should you ask the reason of my addressing one older 
than myself in the manner I have, I refer yoii to my first 
reason for adopting the style in which my former letters 
were written, and to the practice of your own class of re- 
vival .preachers of addressing people respectable in charac- 
ter, venerable with years, and twice as old as themselves, 
as they would address disobedient and wayward children. 

Do you ask, who has required this labor at my hands, I 
being of a different denomination from yourself? I answer, 
God and my own conscience. Homo sum^ et humani a 
vie nil alienum puto. Nec 7nihi sed toto genitum me cre- 
dere mundo. Aside from all sectarian partialities and party 
prejudices, I have a sacred regard for Christianity, and 
would wish to rescue it from that contempt and opprobri- 
um that its professed friends are bringing upon it, and them 
from that degradation to which they have stooped. I know 
my task, for the most part, is at present a thankless one : 
and although I am satisfied that you will derive much be- 
nefit, and your friends and community at large still more, 
from my labors, yet I expect to incur your enmity and the 
bitter reproach and invective of your friends. But for this I 
care but little. Publicum honum privato est praeferendum, 
I have hitherto lived without your friendship, and with 
your sectarian enmity ; and I expect still so to live, if God 
is pleased to spare my life ; having as little to fear from 
the one as to hope from the other. There are now many 
in community who will openly and verbally condemn both 
me and my motives in this labor, who at the same time 
mentally assent to the truth of my statements, and secretly 
applaud my motives. But the time will come, whether I 
live to see it or not, when justice will be done to my mo- 
tives, not secretly, but openly and generally. But what- 
ever the contempt, or reproach, or persecution, that I may 
at present receive, either from you or your friends, nothing 
shall provoke my indignation, or excite my enmity, or in- 
duce me to harbor towards you any other feelings than 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



29 



those of friendship and good will, and an ardent desire to 
promote your and the public weal. And I must, and will 
exercise charity enough towards you to believe that, what- 
ever may be your follies and errors in theory or practice, 
you do, nevertheless, love Christianity, and desire its gene- 
ral prevalence in the world — that with all the deformity in 
which you view it, with all the corruptions interwoven with 
it, in your creed, you discover in it something of a divine 
original, that no human system can be compared to, or sup- 
ply the lack of — and that you would most seriously depre- 
cate the extinction of its light, or the general prevalence 
of infidelity of its truths, among mankind. 

If, then, you wish to check the rapid march of infidelity 
in the land, shut the mouths of scoffers and revilers of re- 
ligion, rescue Christianity from contempt, and its profes- 
sors from degradation ; and give universal prevalence and 
efficacy to that Gospel which alone can point out the true 
path of virtue and happiness to man here, enable him to 
bear his trials with fortitude, soothe the anguished heart of 
the afflicted, give stability to his hopes in the hour of dis- 
solution, light the dark avenues of the tomb, and point 
the trembling souls of mortals as they flutter from their 
dying lips to the bright and peerless mansions of unsullied 
day, immortal peace and endless joy — if, I say, you desire 
these things, I entreat you, dear Sir, to abandon at once 
whatever is extravagant, enthusiastic, wild and ridiculous 
in your practice, and whatever is absurd, unreasonable, and 
anti-scriptural in your creed. This is the only way of ac- 
complishing these desirable objects. For these errors have 
ever been the fruitful source of infidelity and irreligion ; 
and ever vv^ill remain their hot-bed and nursery while they 
continue in being; and especially while they are held to 
with such pertinacity by men of your rank and station. 

Those extravagances in practice, I have already pointed 
out. or at least so far brought to view, that by what your 
own memory will supply, you will be enabled to see them, 
and I trust your own good judgment will teach you to aban- 
don them. But your system of doctrines^ I conceive, is 
also fundamentally corrupt, irrational, and unscriptural. 
And as you perceive I have materially altered my style of 
writing since my former communications, I shall not any 
longer beg the question at issue; but shall proceed to 

3# 



30 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIIf. 



examine the fundamental principles of your system, show by 
rational and scriptural argumentation their mter destitution 
of solid foundation, and prove by the same method, the 
parental character and impartial grace of God, and the ulti- 
mate reconciliation and salvation of all his intellectual 
offspring. And whatever may have been your impressions 
relative to my style and language in former epistles, I trust 
you will have no reason to complain hereafter of any want 
of deference to your standing or respectfulness in my lan- 
guage ; though seeing I have such hope I shall use great 
plain7tess of speech." Yours, «&:c. 



LETTER V. 

On tke doctri?ie of the Fall. 

Dear Sir — Having in my last letter given you the long 
promised, and as I presume, satisfactory, explanation^ I 
shall now, in pursuance of my design, and agreeably to 
my promise, proceed to examine the fundamental doctrines 
of your creed, strip them of the disguise with which they 
are attempted to be concealed from vulgar eyes, in your 
preaching, show them destitute of foundation in truth, and 
present you with the simple, but glorious doctrines con- 
tained in the Scriptures. And in order that you may be 
benefitted by what I have to say, I only ask of 3^ou, to hear 
me candidly and patiently, divesting yourself of all pre- 
judice and preconceived opinion, and partiality to systems, 
so far at least as to give my arguments all the weight to 
which they may be entitled. You will not be benefitted, 
nor will it indeed answer for you, to pass by them with 
contempt, merely because you esteem yourself orthodox, 
and me heterodox. For this would be again begging the 
question, assuming more than a discerning community will 
concede as your right, and exhibiting the same error and 
folly, the ridiculousness of which I have heretofore suffi- 
ciently pointed out. And besides, true Orthodoxy maybe 
very different from what you imagine it to be. Orthodoxy 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



31 



signifies soundness of doctrine or opinion in matters of 
religion." And if, on examination, your doctrine appears 
— as I verily believe it will — very unsound, and even rot- 
ten to the core, you will readily perceive that you cannot 
justly claim this high prerogative. And if what you esteem 
heterodoxy, shall on examination prove to be sound doc- 
trine, the scales will be turned in my favor, and I might, 
in imitation of some great names, treat your doctrines with 
the same contempt with which you affect to treat mine. 
But to do this I have no disposition, as in fact, there is no 
necessity for it. And I will add, it never is done by any 
who deem themselves competent fairly to meet, and suc- 
cessfully to refute those they consider, or pretend to con- 
sider, in error. " To the law and to the testimony : if they 
speak not according to this word, it is because there is no 
light in them." 

The first (which is with you a fundamental) doctrine 
which I shall notice, is that of original sin, or the fall of 
man. And lest it should be said that I misrepresent your 
views upon this subject, I shall state the doctrine in the 
very language of your own creed taken from the " Con- 
fession of Faith and Catechisms of the Presbyterian church 
in the United States of America, as amended and ratified 
by the General Assembly in 1821," and from the writings 
of the founder and most eminent authors of your sect. — 
By these authorities we are told that "Our first parents, 
being seduced by the subtlety of satan, sinned in eating 

the forbidden fruit By this sin they fell from their 

original righteousness, and communion with God, and so 
became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties 
and parts of soul and body. They being the root of all 
mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same 
death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their 
posterity, descending from them by ordinary generation. 
From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly in- 
disposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and whol- 
ly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions. 
Every sin, both original and actual, being a transgression 
of the righteous law of God, and contrary thereunto, doth 
in its own nature bring guilt upon the sinner, whereby he 
is bound over to the wrath of God, and curse of the law, 
and so made subject to death, with all miseries, spiritual, 



33 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



temporal, and eternal." — Confession of Faiths chapter 6. 

" God created man male and female, after his own like- 
ness, in kiiowledge, righteousness^ and holiness The 

covenant being made with Adam, not only for himself, but 
for his posterity, all mankind descending from him by or- 
dinary generation, sinned in him, and fell with him in his 
first transgression. All mankind by their fall lost commu- 
nion with God, are under his wTath and curse, and so made 
liable to all the miseries of this life, to death itself, and to 
the pains of hell forever." — See Shorter Catechism, An- 
swers to Questions 10, 16, and 19, 'pullished hy authority 
with the Confession. 

By the expression " all mankind" being so frequently 
used, and the corruption represented so entire and univer- 
sal, and the penalty so aw^ful, we are to understand that 
no exception is made ; but every individual of the human 
family — not excepting infants as soon as (or even before) 
they are born — is an object of the infinite wrath of God, 
and subject to his endless curse, merely because our first 
parents ate of the interdicted fruit ! If there is any dispute 
about this being your doctrine, after the above citations, it 
can be easily settled by a short quotation from Calvin him- 
self. He says : And so even infants bring their damna- 
tion wdth them from their mother's womb ; for although 
they have not yet produced the fruits of their iniquity, they 
have the seed of it enclosed within them. Nay, their whole 
nature is, as it were, a seed of sin ; so that it cannot be 
otherwise than odious and abominable to God." See Insti- 
tutes, Lib. iv, chap. 15, ^ 10. And lest his readers should 
misunderstand, or doubt his belief of this sentiment, he 
indignantly disavows the opposite opinion : ^' As if," says 
he, " I denied that the w^hole race of Adam was by nature 
under a curse, so that even infants before being born to the 
light, are liable to eternal death.''' 

The above quotations present briefly the outlines of your 
doctrine of original sin, or the fall of man. But that it 
may be seen in all its relations and bearings, as to cause 
and effect, it is necessary to state your views of the decree 
of God, by which the fall was predestinated or foreordain- 
ed. " God from all eternity did by the niost wise and holy 
counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain 
whatsoever comes to pass." '* God the creator of all things 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



33 



doth uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all creatures, ac- 
tions, and things, from the greatest even to the least, by 
his most wise and holy providence, according to his infal- 
lible foreknowledge, and the free and immutable counsel 
of his owR will, to the praise of the glory of his wisdom, 
power, justice, goodness, and mercy." Confession^ chs. 3d 
and 5th. " God's decrees are the wise, free and holy acts 
of the counsel of his will, whereby, from all eternity, he 
hath, for his own glory, unchangeably foreordained what- 
soever comes to pass in time, especially concerning angels 
and men." — Larger Catechism^ Answer to Question 12. 

Calvin says, " I acknowledge this to be my doctrine : 
that not merely by the permission of God, but by his secret 
counsel, Adam fell, and by his fall drew all his posterity 
into eternal ruin." Respon. ad calumnias iiehuloiiis^ Tract 
TheoL p. 634. Again he says, " Man is blinded by the 
will and commandment of God." Piscator, a zealous ad- 
vocate of the same sentiment, says, " Reprobates (and ac- 
cording to your sentiments a large portion of mankind 
were such in Adam) are absolutely ordained to this two- 
fold end: to undergo everlasting punishment, and neces- 
sarily to sin, and therefore to sin that they might be justly 
punished." 

Thus, Sir, I might go on and adduce a large mass of 
testimony, from your Confession, Catechisms, and most 
eminent writers, stating and arguing the monstrous doc^ 
trine here introduced. But I deem it unnecessary. 

What has been stated is sufficiently explicit. And be^ 
sides, my page seems already defiled by the quotatioiAS 
above made. And were it not an undeniable and humilia- 
ting fact that many great men, of undoubted discrimination 
in other things, and practically ornaments to the Christian 
church, had believed and argued the doctrine, and that it is 
still believed and urged upon community, as the sine qua 
non^ with a zeal becoming a better cause, and adhered to with 
the tenacity of the death grasp of a drowning man, and that 
too by men, like yourself, in the highest stations in society, 
I should consider it altogether a work of supererogation to 
aittempt an exposition or a formal refutation of it: and 
ghould be disposed to say of it, in the langi^age of the poetj 
• • It is a monster of so frightful mien, 
As, to be hated, needs but to bq seen.'* 



34 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



But the importance that is still attached to this doctrine b;^ 
many honest and good people, together with my own con- 
victions of its extremely pernicious tendency, will, I trust, 
be a sufficient justification of my labor in exposing its 
falsity. 

To begin then, I observe, 

1. That the premises are altogether assumed, and per- 
fectly untenable and indefensible. 

2. The conclusions or inferences are some of them ille- 
gitimate, and taken altogether, are irreconcilable with 
themselves, and involve absolute impossibilities. And 
hence, 

3. The doctrine is at war both with reason and revela- 
tion. 

1. The 'premises are false. By what authority, I ask, is 
it affirmed that man was created in knoivledge^ righteous- 
ness, and holiness? Is it not palpably evident, from the 
scriptural account, that man had as much, and even more 
knowledge, and equally retained the image of God, after 
his transgression as before ? After the transgression, the 
Lord God said. Behold the man is become as one of us to 
knoio good and evil." Gen. iii : 22. Wherein did the right- 
eousjiess and holiness of Adam consist, when he was crea- 
ted, and before he had acted at all ? " He that doeth right- 
eousness is righteous." Adam could no more be righteous 
or holy before he practiced righteousness and holiness, than 
he could be unrighteous or sinful before he practiced ini- 
quity. As an unrighteous or sinful character is the result 
of sinful practices, so a righteous and holy character is the 
result of righteous and holy practices. A character either 
of holiness or sinfulness must first be formed by practice 
before it can exist. And it is as absurd to talk about either 
of these characters without practice, as it would be to talk 
of a conquer er who had never conquered, or ^ vanquished 
man who had never been beaten, merely because, in case 
of battle, both these characters might be attained ; or to 
talk of a noisy infant which had never made any noise^ 
merely because it was capable of it ; or of a learned man, 
who had never been taught, because he was capacitated to 
learn. 

Adam was created innocent, to be sure ; but he was nei- 
iher virtuous nor vicious till he became so by practice ; 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN* 



36 



mpMe of knowledge, but not possessed of it till he had 
been taught or learned it : in short, as to his moral cha- 
racter, if we allow that he possessed one, he was like any 
and all the rest of the human species when they are born 
into the world. Do you ask, then, wherein consisted the 
image of God in which he was created ? I answer, it con- 
sisted in his being, as the child or offspring of God, a ra- 
tional, intelligent, moral and spiritual being, with capacities 
for knowledge and happiness : the same as a child that is 
now born into the world, may be said to be in the image or 
likeness of its father, though the child may be as yet per- 
fectly ignorant, and neither virtuous nor vicious, though the 
father may be both wue and virtuous. 

Again, by what authority do you maintain that a " cove- 
nant was made with Adam, not only for himself, but for 
all his posterity,''^ which, in its. details, involved, (as the 
consequence of its violation on the part of man,) those 
dreadful and endless calamities, which you profess to be- 
lieve were the annexed penalty of the divine law ? Where 
is there even the shadow of evidence in proof of such a 
theory ? There is none. No account is given in the Bi- 
ble of any such covenant ever having existed. And indeed, 
none such ever could have existed, in justice either to God 
or man. God had no right (for even Deity himself can 
never have the right to do wrong) to impose or inflict such 
a penalty on Adam's posterity for his fault ; because it 
would have been the climax of injustice and cruelty. And 
Adam had no right to stipulate for his children, in such a 
foolish covenant as this, and barter away their temporal 
and eternal well-being, without their consent. No, Sir, 
even you yourself, as great a stickler as you are for this 
theory, would not dare, nay, you could not have the hardi- 
hood and injustice, even with what you conceive to be your 
fallen nature, to make a covenant or agreement with the 
public authorities by which you would jeopardize the lives 
of your own children, by which you would stipulate that 
unless you lived perfectly sinless all your life time, your 
children should all be publicly executed. Should you enter 
into such a stipulation as this, you and your children would 
be as likely to escape the penalty as Adam and his pos- 
terity were, and no more so : for — saying nothing about 
the decree of God by which you hold man fell — your Gate- 



36 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



ehism says he was made " subject to fall." And as 
much as you would be startled at the idea of making such 
stipulations, relative to the life or death of your children, 
the injustice and cruelty of the covenant and penalty agreed 
to, according to your theory, by Adam for his posterity, 
would exceed that in your case, as far as endless penalties 
exceed terrvporal. 

I shall resume this subject in my next. Yours, &c. 



LETTER VI. 

The same subject continued^ 

Sir — In further commenting on the covenant which you 
say was " made with Adam, not only for himself, but for 
his posterity," and in consequence of his violation of 
which, "all mankind, descending from him by ordinary 
generation, sinned in him, and fell with him in his first 
transgression," &c., I do aver — and with the least reflec- 
tion your own good sense must assent to the truth of the 
assertion — that it was utterly impossible, in the very nature 
of things, for all mankind (Adam's posterity) to sin in him, 
in any proper sense of the word sin. What is sin ? An 
apostle hath said, " Sin is the transgression of the law.^ 
And again, " where there is no law, there can be no trans- 
gression." Now in order for sin to be committed, a law 
must be promulgated, and that law must be understood by 
its subjects, and they must transgress it themselves. They 
cannot do it by proxy ^ any more than they can obey it by 
proxy. But will you say that Adam's posterity understood 
the divine law before they existed? Impossible! and equally 
so, that they should have transgressed it. Again, I would 
ask, is it possible for any one to sin, without feeling guilt 
or remorse? But whoever felt guilt, remorse, or condem- 
nation for Adam's sin, besides himself? None. So far 
from it, no one would ever have known that Adam did sin, 
unless they had been told of it, or it had been handed 
dowTi by tradition. It is true, people may be traditionated 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AUHN. 



37 



into almost any belief. And you and those of your faith 
may persuade some weak minds to say they feel condemn- 
ed on account of Adam's sin. But there never was yet 
an intelligent person that could understandingly say, and 
feel that. they were guilty on that account. Suppose, for 
instance, here is a man with a wife and a large family of 
children about him — under the influence of a most wicked 
and depraved disposition, he murders his wife and all his 
children but one infant son ; and then commits suicide.— 
This infant is preserved and brought up to manhood with- 
out ever being told any thing of his origin, or the iniquity 
of his father. Would he, or could he, while thus igno- 
rant, feel any guilt or condemnation for his father's mis- 
deeds? No. Well, suppose he is informed of these, after 
arriving to manhood — would he then feel guilty on the 
account ? Certainly not. He might feel some grief or 
mortification, but no guilt. 

Now as the crimes of this father were certainly as great, 
if not greater, than that of Adam in eating the forbidden 
fruit, why should not the son feel as guilty on account of 
them, as Adam's posterity for his sin ? And if Adam's 
posterity were de facto guilty, and counted and punished 
as such by God, for his sin, why would it not be perfectly 
right for this young man to be executed on the gallows, 
because his father was a murderer ? You would shudder 
at such barbarity, cruelty, and injustice : and yet, strange 
as it is, you do not hesitate to ascribe greater cruelty and 
injustice to the Father of all mercies. 

But this doctrine of imputation is not only absurd and 
indefensible in itself, but is directly counter to the word of 
God. He says, Ezekiel xviii : " "Ym. soul that sinneth, it 
shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, 
neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son ; the 
righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the 
wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. As I live, 
saith the Lord God, ye shall no more use this proverb in 
Israel, saying, the fathers have eaten sour grapes and the 
children's teeth are set on edge." 

Again ; when you say that " all mankind, by their fall, 
lost communion with God" &c., and are " so made liable, 
to all the miseries of this life, to death itself &c., mean- 
ing temporal death, or the dissolution of the body ; you 

4 



38 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKlf^. 



assume that man would never have died a natural death 
had he not sinned — that he would have lived, in the state 
in which he was created, eternally ; than which it is hardly 
possible to conceive a greater absurdity. Pray tell me how 
x4dam was constituted 1 Of what materials was he com- 
posed? Had he a mortal, or an immortal constitution? 
By maintaining that he never would have died had he not 
sinned, you assume at once that he was immortal. Now 
if he were immortal, and became mortal by sinning, pray 
tell me why the angels, who, according to your theory, 
sinned in heaven, did not become mortal by the same pro- 
cess 1 If Adam were immortal in his natural constitution, 
it is certain that flesh and blood then partook of immor- 
tality ! though we read that flesh and blood cannot inherit 
the kingdom of God : so that, according to your theory, 
the sin of our first parent opened a way for man to inherit 
the kingdom of God, which he never could have done had 
he not sinned? But I ask, was not Adam " formed of the 
dust of the earth" ? Was he not constituted of the four 
cardinal elements — earth, air, fire, and water ? And are 
not these elements subject to change, decay and dissolu- 
tion ? Was not Adam subject to the same fate, the same 
influence, and the same modification, as they? Had he 
been immersed in water, would he not have drowned ? 
Had he been enveloped in flames, would he not have burn- 
ed ? Had he been smothered and deprived of vital air, 
would he not have been suflbcated? And yet you main- 
tain that he never could have died had he not eaten of the 
forbidden fruit. 

If Adam was once transformed from an immortal to a 
mortal being by sin, why, I ask, could he not have trans- 
formed himself again from mortality to immortality, by 
breaking off from his sins by righteousness, and turning to 
the Lord, with full purpose of heart to serve and obey him ? 
" To be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually 
minded is life and^eace." Carnal mindedness and spirit- 
ual mindedness are here represented as proper antipodes, 
and so also are their effects and wages ; and one is as cer- 
tain as the other. 

The fact is, " the creature was made subject to vanity,'^' 
(imperfection and mortality,) " not willingly, but by reason 
of HIM who had subjected the same ; in hope, that the crea- 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



39 



tion itself shall also be delivered from the bondage of cor- 
ruption into the glorious freedom of the sons of God." 

Adam, was evidently created mortal and subject to dis- 
solution ; though he probably did not know it till after 
transgressing. The tree of knoicledge of good and evil, 
revealed to him this fact ; but was not the cause of his mor* 
tality. God says to him after his transgression, "Dust 
thou art" (not, " dust hast thou made thyself by sinning," 
but) " Bust THOU art" (for out of the ground wast thou 
taken) " and unto dust shalt thou return,''^ 

One other remark I here make, w^hich is worthy of your 
particular notice — -If natural death, or the dissolution of 
the body, were the penalty, or a part of the penalty, threat- 
ened to Adam for transgression, then the penalty was not 
executed as God told Adam it should be, and the serpent 
told the truth when he said, " ye shall not surely die ;" for 
God had said, " In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt 
surely die." If your theory be correct, that natural death 
were included in this threatening, then God told the lie, 
and the serpent the truth ! for according to the Scriptures, 
Adam lived several hundred years after this, and of course 
did not die " the day^^ he ate of the forbidden fruit. 

But this difficulty respecting the threatened penalty, is 
entirely obviated by admitting, what is evidently the fact, 
that it had no reference to natural death — that it related to 
moral death and condemnation — "to be carnally minded 
is death" — ■" the wages of sin is death" — " dead in tres- 
passes and sins." This death Adam died the very aay he 
ate of the forbidden fruit : he felt shame, guilt, condemna- 
tion, and moral death. Moreover, we may admit that he 
came to the knoioledge of his approaching natural death, 
without supposing this to be any part of the penalty. 

Having made these remarks on the general character 
and untenableness of your premises, I pass — 

Secondly: — To show that your conclusions or infer- 
ences drawn from them are illegitimate, irreconcilable with 
themselves, and involve absolute impossibilities. 

Granting that your premises were correct in every par- 
ticular — that man was created in knowledge, in righteous- 
ness, and true holiness — that he was really created immor- 
tal, and as perfect as your creed would make him — by v/hat 
fair or legitimate mode of reasoning do you conclude that. 



I 



40 LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 

by simply eating an apple, or (if this account be figurative) 
by partaking of the forbidden fruit, our first parents be- 
came " wholly defiled in all the faculties and 'parts of soul 
and body'' ? As well might you urge that a bird had be- 
come ^i fish because it chanced to dip the tip of its wing in 
water. It must be a wonderful sagacity, indeed, to discover 
how one act of this kind could prove a lever by which to 
overturn at once, and radically change, the whole moral 
and physical world of our race. Eecollect I am not labor- 
ing to show that sin had no effect, — for I have shown you 
that I believe it had an effect, and what that effect ivas — 
but I think it must be apparent to the most superficial rea- 
soner, that its effects could not have been what your Con- 
fession represents them to be — to wholly defile our first 
parents and all their unborn race, in all the faculties and 
parts of soul and body. 

Can you imagine it possible for a person, who has al- 
ways lived in habits of virtue, has never practiced iniquity 
of any kind, allow^ing such an one could be found in the 
present day; or for one who has been regenerated, born 
again, and become spiritually a child of God ; or for such 
a person, say, as John the Baptist, who was filled with the 
Holy Ghost from his mother's womb ; — can you imagine 
it possible, I say, for such a person to become instantane- 
ously wholly and radically defiled, in all the faculties and 
parts of soul and body, by one act of this kind? I hardly 
think, Sir, you will dare answer in the affirmative. They 
might, it is true, by one act, coramence a course of iniquity, 
which, if persisted in, would ultimately lead to great mo- 
ral depravity ; but could not without a miracle experience 
such a change as the one under consideration. 

Much less could our first parents have transmitted this 
entire and total defilement " in all the faculties and parts of 
soul and body" to their posterity, by ordinary generation. 
Was the act of transgression a moral or physical act? If 
it were a moral act, how could it produce such a physical 
effect as to wholly defile all the faculties and parts of the 
body'' 1 If it were a physical act, how could it produce 
such a moral effect as to " wholly defile all the faculties 
and parts of the souV ?■ And if both moral and physical, 
it were utterly incapable of loholly defiling all the facul- 
ties and parts of soul and body. It could noX produce such 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



41 



an effect now : no man couid justly be considered as wholly 
defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body for 
one act only. We reckon a man vicious, or a bad man, 
when his general character^ or a majority of his acts are 
vicious or bad ; and virtuous, or a good man, when his 
general character, or a majority of his acts, are virtuous 
or good. But we have no account of any other sin that 
Adam ever committed in his whole lifetime, except that of 
eating the forbidden fruit : for aught the Bible tells us, he 
might have been as pure and holy as the angels in heaven, 
after his transgression ; especially if he had repented and 
reformed. But by what process of reasoning you main- 
tain thai he transmitted a totals moral and 'physical defile- 
ment to all his posterity^ I must confess myself totally 
ignorant ; even should I allow that he was himself so en- 
tirely defiled. Is it possible now-a-days. Sir, for a father 
to transmit, by ordinary generation, to his posterity, all his 
own defilement and guilt of soul and body ? You will not 
pretend it. For the moment you admit it, you will be 
obliged to admit that if a father is a murderer, his son 
must be, ipso facto ^ a murderer also, because he descended 
from his father by ordinary generation. If the father has 
been guilty of any crime whatever, the son must be guilty 
of the same, on the same account. If the father has mur- 
dered, the son must be hung as a murderer; because in 
fact, he is one by the act of his father ! And not only so, 
but if the father has any defilement or disease of lody^ the 
son must have it also, because he descends from him by 
ordinary generation. If the father has a fever-sore, the 
son will be born with one : if the father has had a leg am- 
putated, the son will be born with but one leg ! 

Thus, Sir, I might proceed to state an infinite number 
of consequences and conclusions equally as monstrous as 
the above, (to own himself an advocate or believer of which, 
any sensible man would blush,) and yet they would be as 
legitimately drawn from your premises as your own con- 
clusions and inferences are. I know you would shrink 
from avowing such conclusions; but they follow necessa- 
rily from your fundamentals. If, then, you would avoid 
such monstrous notions and glaring absurdities as are in- 
volved in these conclusions, I know of no effectual way 
for vou to do it, but to abandon at once premises so false 

4# 



42 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



and untenable as those on which your creed is founded. 

I designed to have noticed some other features, and point- 
ed out some other absurdities involved in your doctrine of 
original sin, or the fall, in this epistle ; but the prescribed 
limits which I have assigned to each letter, will not admit 
of it. And besides, it may be as well, perhaps, to defer 
this labor till a future number, and attend to it under ano- 
ther head, or properly another branch of the same subject ; 
in the mean time leaving you to digest what has been said. 

I think I have said sufficient to show that your premises 
are false ; and of course all legitimate conclusions drawn 
from them must be equally so. The doctrine in question 
is therefore shown to be unfounded in fact — absurd in its 
details, and involves impossibilities; and is not only ?m- 
sanctioned by the word of God, but directly contrary to the 
Scriptures. It cannot, therefore, stand any longer than 
till brought to the test of reasonable and scriptural inves- 
tigation. 

In my next, I shall take up the counterpart of this sub- 
ject, viz : Total Depravity, and what has been neglected 
here, shall there be attended to; in the mean time, I pray 
God to be with you and give you " a wise and understand- 
mg heart." Respectfully Yours, &c. 



LETTER VII. 

On the Doctrine of Total Depravity. 

Dear Sir — In continuing the examination of the doc- 
trine of original sin, I shall next call your attention to the 
subject of total depravity, the counterpart of what has al- 
readv been considered. And here it may be necessary to 
refresh your memory with a few more extracts from your 
Confession of Faith, &c., in addition to what was quoted in 
my fifth letter. 

By the quotations there made we have seen that your 
creed asserts that " from the original corruption" of man- 
kind, by the sin of Adam, all his posterity are utterly 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



43 



indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and 
WHOLLY inclined to all evil, and that continually." In 
the 9th chap, of your Confession it is declared that " Man 
by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of 
will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation ; so as a 
natural man being altogether averse from that which is 
good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength to 
convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto." 

Your creed not only maintains, as above, the total ina- 
bility of mankind to do good, and their entire inclination 
to all evil, in a state of nature, or in that state in which God 
creates, or brings them into the world ; but further, that 
they are under the absolute necessity of sinning, whether 
they will or not, and that both their obedience and disobedi- 
ence of the commands of God, are sinful. So says your 
Confession, chap. 16, ^ 7. 

'* Works done by unregenerate men, although for the 
matter of them, they may be things which God commands, 
and of good use both to themselves and others ; yet because 
they proceed not from a heart purified by faith ; nor are 
done in a right manner, according to the word ; nor to a 
right end, the glory of God ; they are therefore sinful, and 
cannot please God, or make a man meet to receive grace 
from God. And yet the neglect of them is more sinful 
and displeasing to God." 

How a doctrine with such monstrous features as the 
above presents, when viewed in connexion with the de- 
crees of God by which every thing was foreordained, and 
with other parts of your system, particularly reprobation 
and endless damnation — a doctrine which robs man of his 
relation and obligation to his Creator, and his Creator of 
every amiable attribute and every possible claim to the 
gratitude and obedience of his creatures — how a doctrine, 
I say, of this character ever obtained in the Christian 
church, I am totally incapable of accounting or conceiving, 
excepting from the love of extravagance to which the cler- 
gy became so generally addicted during the dark ages of 
popery. Yet, having once conceived the wild vagary, in 
connexion with others of a similar character, it became 
necessary for them to press into their service, a few isolated 
texts of Scripture as a pretended support to it. And hence> 
we now find that you quote a number of texts of Scrip- 



44 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



ture, (though dislocated from their contexts, and applied 
generally, instead of having the particular application pri- 
marily designed,) in support of the doctrine of total depra- 
vity. I think it best, therefore, before I proceed to a further 
examination of the doctrine, to notice some of the princi- 
pal texts on which you rely for its support. 

St. Paul's language, (Eph. ii : 3.) " And were by nature 
the children of wrath even as others," is much relied on in 
proof of the universal corruption and total depravity of 
human nature. But you must be sensible, Sir, that the 
word nature is variously used and applied in Scripture; 
and that its true meaning can be known only by the sub- 
ject in question, or by the circumstances relating to it. It 
sometimes signifies the natural course and method of 
things, sometimes custom, sometimes prevailing disposi- 
tion, sometimes particular laws in the physical, intellectual 
or moral world, sometimes characters that distinguish one 
dass from another, or designate individuals in the same 
class. From the context in which this expression of Paul 
is found, it is evident he used it to describe that condition 
in which the Ephesians, and indeed the great mass of the 
Gentile world, were, previous to their conversion to Chris- 
tianity. And it is well known that vices of almost every 
description, and a very general depravity, prevailed among 
the Gentiles at that time. It was, therefore, in allusion to 
iheu practices, and not their corrupt origin, that the apos- 
tle uses the above language : and hence he says, wherein 
in time past ye walked according to the course of this 
world,'' &c. But that these were not the practices of all 
Gentiles, and that the nature or customs of some of them 
were good and commendable, is evident from the same 
apostle, (Romans ii : 14. &c.) For when the Gentiles, 
which have not the law, do by nature the things contain- 
ed in the law, these having not the law, are a law unto them- 
selves ; which shew the work of the law written in their 
hearts, their conscience also bearing witness," &c. The 
text in Ephesians, therefore, when it says they "were by 
nature children of wrath even as others," signifies no more 
than the generally prevailing sin and corruption, at that 
time, of the Gentile world, and that, as elsewhere stated 
" the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all un- 
gpodliness and unrio^hteousness of men." 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



45 



Another text, and one which is considered a main pillar 
in support of your theory, is in Ps. li : 5. " Behold I was 
shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.'^ 
That this text gives no support to your doctrine, I think 
will appear obvious, by taking into consideration the time, 
manner, and circumstances in which it was spoken. It 
was a penitential Psalm of David — It is the strong language 
of contrition — spoken in the deep abasement of his soul, 
in view of the great iniquity of which he had been guilty — 
the double crimes of adultery and murder ; and was spo- 
ken, as wdll be seen by the context, with particular refer- 
ence to these sins. The meaning of David evidently was, 
that even had he been born in sin, and always trained to 
evil practices, he could not have done worse. It appears 
from Scripture, that this form of speech was proverbially 
used by the Jews, to express the greatest degree of crimi- 
nality, or the greatest possible degradation of character. 
When the Pharisees questioned the man who had been 
blind, concerning the manner in which he had received his 
sight, the same, or a similar expression occurs. Upon his 
saying, of Jesus, " if this man was not of God he could dQ 
nothing," the Pharisees answer, " Thou wast altogether 
born in sins, and dost thou teach us ?" Now had the ex- 
pression been used among the Jews to signify the corrupt 
origin and entire depravity of human nature, the Phari- 
sees would not have used it as an expression of ignominy 
^ and reproach against the man that had been blind ; for in 
so doing they would have reproached themselves equally 
with him. But no, they were composed of better materi- 
als than their despised neighbor ! In the pride and haughti- 
ness of their souls, they apply the expression to their 
neighbor ; and David in his deep abasement and contrition 
of soul, applies this proverbial language to himself. 

The following are another set of texts of similar import, 
and by you applied to the same use. " And God saw that 
the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that 
every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only 
evil continually. The imagination of man's heart is evil 
from his youth." Gen. vi: 5, viii : 21. "As it is writ- 
ten, there is none righteous, no not one : — There is none 
that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. 
They are all gone out of the way, they are together be-. 



46 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



come unprofitable, there is none that doeth good, no not 
one." Eom. iii : 10,11,12. " The heart is deceitful above 
all things and desperately wicked : who can know it — 
Jer. xvii: 9. "God hath made man upright; but they 
have sought out many inventions." Eccl. vii : 29. 

In these texts I acknowledge, Sir, we have a dreadful 
picture of man. And if it could be shown that this were 
the only and invariable character of all mankind, in all 
ages of the world, the doctrine of total depravity would 
seem to derive strong support and countenance from it : 
though even then, it could not prove that this universal 
corruption was derived from Adam. But, Sir, your own 
good sense must satisfy you, if you are not blinded by your 
partiality to your creed, when you look into the contexts 
and connexions in which these passages are found, and to 
the occasions and circumstances that gave rise to them, 
that they all refer to that accumulated wickedness, that ac- 
quired corruption, that prevailed in the world just before 
the flood, and at the several subsequent periods named; 
that, although they describe in striking language the vi- 
cious propensities too frequently observable in large com- 
munities, and in individuals, which are frequently the result 
of evil habits, perverse education, bad example, or other 
causes which actually exist, and which you will not deny, 
exert a deleterious influence on the morals and habits of 
mankind ; yet they do not convey the idea that those 
abominations are the spontaneous fruits of that nature with 
which mankind are brought into the \vorld ; nor that they 
are produced in all ages of the \vorld ; nor that if they 
were, they are the result of the defection of our first pa- 
rents. When it is said, " the imagination of man's heart 
is evil from his youth,'^ it is not said to be from his birth^ 
nor is it said to be the fact in all ages. It was so from the 
youth of that generation of which God spake. And this 
circumstance seems to have excited the commiseration of 
the Deity. And v/hen Solomon says of men, that they 
have sought out many inventions, it does not follow that 
all those inventions are evil, or even useless. I am incli- 
to believe that as many, if not more, of the inventions that 
men have sought out, are useful, as are pernicious. 

I will here notice one or two more texts, and then con- 
clude this epistle. What is man that he should be clean? 



LETTERS TO EEV. S. C. AlKIN. 



A7 



and he which is born of a woman, that he should be right- 
eous 1 How much more abominable and filthy is man 
which drinketh iniquity like water Job xv : 14, 16. It 
is somewhat singular that these words should ever have 
been pressed into your service as a support to the doctrine 
of total depravity : and I am sensible it never would have 
been done, had not the framers of your creed found them- 
selves in a strait, for want of better evidence. Thesa 
are the words, not of a person inspired, but of Eliphaz, the 
wicked Temanite, and pretended friend of Job, whose cruel 
upbraidings provoked even that patient man to exclaim, 
concerning him and his other two companions, " miserable 
comforters are ye all." — " Ye are all forgers of lies ; ye are 
all physicians of no value. Oh ! that ye would altogether 
hold your peace, and it should be your wisdom." And 
God said to Eliphaz that he had not spoken the thing that 
was right. I should hardly think you would be disposed 
to put much confidence in the words of one who was de- 
clared and known to be a liar, as Eliphaz, the author of the 
above words, was. 

We have now gone through with a brief examination of 
the principal texts commonly adduced in support of origi- 
nal sin and total depravity, and have seen, not only that 
they do not necessarily give support to such an absurd doe- 
trine, but that when fairly construed, and viewed in con- 
nexion with their contexts, and compared with the general 
tenor of Scripture, and the voice of experience and reason, 
they cannot be made to give countenance in any way to 
such a theory. 

In my next I shall endeavor to point out some of the 
absurdities of the doctrine, and show that it is utterly im- 
possible, in the nature of things, that it can be true. 

Yours, &c. 



LETTER VIIL 



The same subject continued, 

Dear Sir — Having shown in my last, that the doctrine 
of total depravity derives no support from the Scriptures 
in general, or from the particular passages which you com- 
monly adduce in favor of it, I propose now to show, from 
•the nature of the subject, and the character of the doctrine, 
that it is impossible it can be true. And here I would ob- 
serve, I shall not attempt to be very systematic, nor at all 
particular in the arrangement of my arguments, but shall 
throw them together in my plain every-day style, just as 
they happen to come into my mind as I pass along. And 

1. The doctrine of total depravity cannot be admitted as 
true, without denying man's accountability, and contending 
that the posterity of Adam cannot sin. Sin is the trans* 
gression of a law, A law is a moral obligation^ binding 
upon the subject. Obligation arises from benefits received. 
Man's nature being totally depraved and wholly evil^ he has 
received no benefit from his Creator — nay, his very exis- 
tence is a citrse. Therefore, his nature being evil, and his 
existence a curse, (if the doctrine of total depravity be true,) 
he has received no benefit from his Creator ; consequently 
is under no obligation to him ; and where no obligation 
exists, there can be no law, and where no law is, there can be 
no transgression. Hence, if man is totally depraved he 
cannot sin. You cannot evade the force of this argument 
by contending that man's nature (or rather that of the first 
man) was good when first brought into existence, but be- 
came evil by his transgression in Eden : because the Deity 
has created, since Adam's sin, and still continues to create 
innumerable multitudes of human beings, and brings them 
into the world just such creatures as he pleases — just such 
creatures as they are. Each human being that now comes 
into the world is the production of God's creating power ; 
and, if totally depraved, cannot sin, for the reason above 
stated. 

Moreover, whatever guilt or pollution to Adam or his 
posterity, you may suppose was the result of his transgres- 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



49 



aion, you hold that this transgression was decreed or fore- 
ordained of God. And can any rational man suppose that 
creatures can be under any obligation to obey a law, when 
their progenitor was foreordained by the legislator to break 
that law and transmit to them a nature totally evil and en- 
tirely incapacitated to obey such law ? Impossible. 

Another reason why man cannot sin, if the doctrine of 
total depravity be true, is, that he, being by nature wholly 
opposite to every thing good, and wholly inclined to every 
thing evil, having nothing good in or about him, can have 
no principle loitkin to dictate aright — no standard of mo- 
ral rectitude^ from which a deviation would be sinful. In 
fact, he can have no conscience ; or if he has, it must be 
wholly vitiated, and would lead him into corruption and 
error, were he to follow its dictates. And, Sir, I will here 
add, that every instance in which you, or I, or any other 
individual of the human family ever felt guilt, remorse, or 
condemnation for vice or sin of any kind, is a refutation of 
the doctrine of total depravity ; and proves that man is not 
wholly corrupt, and entirely destitute of all moral good- 
ness ; for if he were, he could never feel guilt or remorse 
of conscience. 

2. The doctrine of total depravity is an impeachment of 
the divine character. To say God originated a plan to save 
a race of beings that were entirely destitute of every thing 
good ; that were wholly evil, and in fact, worse than good 
for nothing ! To say he sent his Son into the world to save 
such creatures, — that Jesus Christ, the well-beloved and 
only begotten of the Father, came to our world and labor- 
ed, and toiled, and wrought miracles, and preached, and 
suffered, and bled, and died, to purchase and save, redeem 
and restore, such a creature as man, so odious, abominable 
and worthless ! To say all this, implicates the divine cha- 
racter, and particularly divine wisdom, in a most shocking 
manner. 

3. The doctrine of total depravity is at war with the 
most positive and plain declarations of our Saviour and of 
the Scriptures. When there were brought unto Jesus, 
little children, and even infants, (see Matt, xix : 13, &c., 
Mark x : 13, Luke xviii : 15,) he took them in his arms 
and blessed them, saying, of such is the kingdom of God — 
of such is the kingdom of heaven. Now, you will not deny 



50 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



that these infant children were in a ttate of nature. If, 
then, that nature were totally depraved, we must under- 
stand our Saviour as saying, " suffer totally depraved be- 
ings to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of totally 
depraved creatures consisteth the kingdom of God !" " Ex- 
cept ye be converted and become totally depraved ye shall 
not enter into the kingdom of heaven !" Matt, xviii : 3. It 
is, (unless we pervert the language or meaning of Jesus in 
his declaration relative to little children,) utterly impossible 
to understand him in any other sense than as directly con- 
tradicting the doctrine in question. And equally so in 
many other declarations — instance the following : — " How 
much better is a man than a sheep — ye are of more value 
than many sparrows." When God created man, he pro- 
nounced him, and all the rest of his works, good, " very 
good ;" and he has never reversed this declaration. And 
St. Paul says, " every creature of God is good.'' Many 
of the parables of our Lord, and indeed the whole plan of 
man's redemption and salvation, go to show the intrinsical 
excellence of human nature, and the high value that even 
God put upon it. The three parables in Luke xv, are 
to this eifect — the lost sheep, the lost piece of silver, 
and the lost prodigal — the lost sheep was a sheep still, 
notwithstanding it was lost, and intrinsically just as valu- 
able as before it was lost, or after it was found. The piece 
of silver was silver still. And the prodigal was just as 
much, a 5o?zwhen lost as when found, had the same father 
and bore the same image and relationship to him ; although 
when estranged from him, he deprived himself of the en- 
joyment of his father's kindness and favor. 

4. Numerous facts and almost universal observation 
prove the doctrine of total depravity false. Look to man 
in all ages of the world, all states of society, and all sta- 
ges of his existence, and you will not find an age in which 
entire and unmixed evil prevails, nor a state of society 
without some remains of goodness, nor a stage in the ex- 
istence of man wherein no traits of moral excellence are 
to be found. In the most degenerate age of the world or 
state of society, you will find some noble exceptions to the 
general vice, and in the most depraved and polluted wretch 
that walks the earth in human form, some remains of that 
exalted and dignified nature with which his Creator has 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



51 



endowed him. But view mankind generally — " take them 
all in all" — how many excellencies do we see — the smiling 
babe at the mother's breast — the innocent prattle of the lit- 
tle child — the unsuspecting ingenuousness and integrity of 
youth before they have learned to practice deception and 
vice by the bad examples of the world — the affectionate 
solicitude and kind ofBces of father and mother, husband and 
wife, son and daughter, brother and sister. Whence spring 
all these tender feelings, these kindly affections, these be- 
nevolent exertions to promote each other's happiness ? — 
Whence flows the tear of sympathy for the distress of 
others 1 What impulse pushes us irresistibly on to danger, 
labor and sufferings, to rescue a fellow-being from impend- 
ing ruin ? Is it possible for all these to spring from a to- 
tally corrupt fountain 1 Are they all odious and sinful in 
the sight of God ? So says the doctrine of total depravity. 
But, Sir, this is impossible. God does and must approve 
them wherever they are found, though they be but natu- 
ral ; for he commands and ordains them. Man's nature 
is good and sinless ; and when he acts according to its 
dictates he is happy and approved by his Maker. But 
when he perverts and abuses it, v/hen he acts unno.tural^ 
^hen is he guilty and unhappy. Hence, Paul speaks of 
those who go contrary to nature^ and those who are with' 
out natural affection, as the very worst characters in the 
world. (Rom. i: 26,27; 2 Tim. iii : 3.) " Take nature's 
path and mad opinions leave," and with the assistance of 
the revelation God has given us we shall not materially err. 

You contend that Adam was created perfect, or far more 
so than any of his posterity have ever been since. But, 
Sir, I believe the world furnishes many far more noble ex- 
amples of perfection and dignified virtue than Adam ever 
exhibited, even before his defection. I might refer you to 
many examples in almost all ages of the world : But one 
instance shall suffice for the present. Look to Joseph, the 
beloved son of the patriarch Jacob. What fault do you 
find with his character and life ? Where can you find one 
blemish? Where an instance of depravity? Follow him 
through all the stages of his life, from childhood to youth, 
manhood, and old age — see him maltreated and abused, 
persecuted and sold, betrayed and imprisoned-^-see him 
resisting the strongest temptations, the machinations of an 



■I 



S2 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



artful and designing woman, with every prospect of secre- 
sy of his crime, and promotion to honor and wealth if he 
yielded, and the certain expectation of imprisonment and 
ruin if he resisted — see his virtue and integrity triumph- 
ing over all this formidable array of besetting temptations — 
and then say, if Joseph was totally depraved, destitute of 
every moral excellency, wholly opposed to every thing 
good, and wholly inclined to every thing evil ! Say, if he 
did not exhibit more firmness of virtue, more integrity of 
character, more, much more moral excellency than Adam 
ever exhibited 1 Did Adam resist more powerful tempta- 
tions than these ? Would he with his perfect nature have 
withstood what Joseph withstood with his fallen nature ? 
Did Adam ever resist a single temptation '? Did he not 
yield to the very first assault of the tempter ? How then 
can you believe that he was perfect in virtue and even in 
holiness, and all his posterity entirely devoid of every par- 
ticle of moral excellency ? But the world has produced 
many examples of virtue and excellence of character equal 
to that of Joseph, and far surpassing in dignity any thing 
that we know of our first parents ; and every one of them 
is a refutation of the monstrous notion of total depravity. 

Why, Sir, if I believed in the doctrine of total depravity, 
I should not dare to live among men. I should expect 
that every morsel of food I took from the hand of a fellow- 
being would be mingled with corrosive sublimate ; every 
draught of water tinctured with arsenic or night-shade ; 
that some deadly poison would be placed in every dish and 
every cup I took : that every man I met in the street would 
have a dagger concealed under his cloak, or a brace of pistols 
about his person with which to take my life I Nay, I should 
not even dare, unarmed, to meet you in the streets of this 
city ; for notwithstanding your fair reputation, weight 
of moral character, and Christian profession, I should fear 
(did I believe human nature was totally depraved, " wholly 
opposite to every thing good, and wholly inclined to every 
thing evil," " totally defiled in all the parts and faculties of 
soul and body") that all these pretensions and professions 
were nothing but hypocrisy and sheer imposition, practised 
on community to deceive the simple, and prey upon the un- 
wary ; and that you were capable of the darkest and bloodi» 
est deeds of villainy ! In short, I should flee from the abodes 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



53 



and all the haunts of mea, retire to some far-off recess in 
the wilderness, or some deep and lonely cavern, and there 
shut myself up where human eye could never see me more. 
But no, Sir, I have no fears of this kind ; no such dreadful 
apprehensions to torment and drive me from society. And 
for the plain reason that I do not believe in this doctrine. 
I can confide in your goodness, your natural goodness of 
heart ; and in that of my fellow-beings generally, and be- 
lieve there is so much goodness and benignity in the hearts 
of men that they would sooner do me a kindness than an 
injury. 

I know of but one argument in the world that appears 
at all in favor of the doctrine of total depravity — that is, 
the fact that some eminent preachers of your denomination 
have publicly declared and maintained that they should 
hereafter rejoice in ecstacies of bliss at the sight of the 
unspeakable and endless torments of the damned in hell ! 
Could I believe such men spoke from experience and ob- 
servation of the natural feelings of their own hearts, I 
should be inclined to believe that they possibly might be 
totally depraved. But I cannot think so bad even of these 
men ; for they are most of them touched with feelings of 
pity and commiseration of the sufferings of their fellow- 
beings here, and are making great exertions to save man- 
kind from so dreadful a fate hereafter. And hence the 
benevolence of heart they manifest towards mankind for 
time and eternity, betrays the falsity of their creed and 
professions that they shall hereafter rejoice at the sight of 
the miseries of their fellow-beings. And hence, as this 
last vestige of proof is betrayed and removed by the feel- 
ings and conduct of its own advocates, I may now safely 
dismiss this subject from further notice, believing that your 
discriminating mind will properly weigh the arguments 
adduced, and discard a doctrine that begins, and continues, 
and ends in such palpable inconsistency and absurdity, as 
that of total depravity. 

In my next I shall commence the examination of the doc- 
trine of particular election and reprobation. 

Yours, &c. 



5* 



LETTER IX. 



On the doctrine of Election and Reprohation. 

Dear Sir — Of all the doctrines and dogmas in the creed 
of John Calvin, there is probably none of which you and 
other advocates of that system are more ashamed, than 
that now to be examined — none which you more studiously 
strive to conceal, or dress in a fictitious garb, or whose de- 
formities more effort is made to keep from public view, 
than the doctrine of particular election and reprobation. 
And I do not wonder that it is so. I rather wonder that 
the doctrine could ever have been invented by any man 
that had ever seen a Bible, or made a profession of the 
Christian religion — that it has been so long maintained in 
a church called Christian — or that any one can be found at 
the present day, who will maintain, either from sinister or 
conscientious motives, a doctrine so barbarous as this. — - 
And I could not have believed but that this relic of dark- 
ness and cruelty had long since sunk into merited oblivion, 
had I not occasionally heard it indirectly drop from the 
lips of yourself and others of your order, and on opening 
your Confession of Faiths (which, by the b\^e, is not de- 
signed for vulgar eyes to see.) found the doctrine there set 
forth in bold relief as the siimmum honum of your creed, and 
authorised as the standard doctrine of your church, even 
at this day^ by your General Assembly. 

Read the following. Sir, from your own precious " Con* 
fessioJi^^^ and tremble, lest you be one of the non-elect : — 

" By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his 
glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto ever- 
lasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death. 

" These angels and men, thus predestinated and fore- 
ordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed ; and 
their number is so certain and definite that it cannot he 
either increased or diminished, 

" Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, 
God, before the foundation of the world was laid, accord- 
ing to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret 
counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



55 



unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, 
without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseve- 
rance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, 
as conditions, or causes moving him thereunto ; and all to 
the praise of his glorious grace. 

" As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hatk 
he, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, fore- 
ordained all the means thereunto. Wherefore, they who 
are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, 
are effectually called, &;c. Neither are any other redeemed 
hy Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, 
and saved, hut the elect only, 

" The rest of mankind, God was -pleased, according k) 
the unsearchable counsel of his own will — to pass by, and 
to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sins, to the 
praise of his glorious justice." — Confession of Faith, chap, 
iii : § 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. 

" Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and 
saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh w'hen, 
and where, and how he pleaseth. So also are all other 
elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called 
by the ministry of the word. 

" Others not elected, although they may be called by the 
ministry of the word, and may have some common opera- 
tions of the Spirit, yet they never truly come to Christ, 
and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men not 
professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other 
way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their 
lives according to the light of nature, and the law of that 
religion they do profess ; and to assert and maintain that 
they may, is very pernicious and to be detested." — Con- 
fession, chap. X : § 3 and 4. 

This, Sir, is your doctrine, unvarnished, undisguised, as 
set forth in your Confession of Faith, And now I ask 
you, if you honestly and sincerely believe in it, whether 
you do or can consider yourself perfectly secure and safe — 
whether you are, or can be certain of your own election — 
whether you are sure that you were not reprobated from 
all eternity, as a vessel of wrath fitted to destruction ? Are 
you not deceived ? True, you may have had " some com- 
mon operations of the Spirit yet you may have " never 
truly come to Christ," and therefore, it is possible yoa 



66 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



cannot he saved,^^ You and Mr. Lansing, I understand, 
have once acknovvledged that you were deceived in rela- 
tion to your conversion, and were never undeceived till 
after Mr. Finney's visit to this place, when you think you 
were truly converted. Now I beseech you to pause and 
reflect, and inquire, whether it is not possible that you 
were mistaken this last time as well as the first. Appear- 
ances may have deceived you. You might, from your 
habits of intimacy with the elect, and from the subject of 
religion being so much agitated at that time, have had 
some common operations of the Spirit, and so received a 
false impression relative to your calling and election, and 
after all, be found on the left hand, excluded from the so- 
ciety of the elect, and have to take up your abode with 
reprobates and devils to all eternity. I forget, however, 
while I am expostulating with you, and endeavoring to 
dissuade you from your strong confidence in your own 
election and salvation, and to incite you to a more careful 
examination of your condition, that after all, if the doctrine 
be true, it is of no use ; for all your prayers and confes- 
sions, and penitence and endeavors, be they ever so dili- 
gent, to frame your life according to the best light you have, 
are perfectly unavailing, and can do no good. If you are 
a reprobate, you never can be effectually called nor saved. 
Your doom is fixed — your fate is sealed, and eternity can 
never see an end of your torments, or hear the termination 
of your groans ! 

But I do wrong, perhaps, to reason with you on the sup- 
position of the doctrine being true ; for I do not admit that 
it can — not even that there is the remotest possibility of its 
being true. For it is not only unsanctioned by the word 
of God, but directly opposed to its plainest testimonies. 
True, you quote many texts of Scripture with the design 
to give countenance to it ; but they are all either isolated 
texts, disjointed and entirely separated from their connex- 
ion, totally perverted from their original design, and grossly 
misapplied ; or most barbarously garbled, and prevented 
from speaking their whole and entire meaning with their 
contexts. Rom. ix : 11, 13, 16, 18, 22, and 23, which your 
Confession quotes in support of your theory, say nothing 
about " some men and angels being predestinated to ever- 
lasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death." 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



57 



There is not a single word said in these passages, either 
about " everlasting life, or everlasting death," and evidently 
no application of them to such a subject was intended. — 
They evidently relate to the wisdom and sovereignty of 
God in his making choice of Jacob instead of Esau, as the 
seed of promise, through whose lineage the Messiah was 
to come ; and to the establishment of a church of elect or 
chosen believers, zealous of good works ; not however to 
the eternal exclusion of the non-elect, or then unbelievers, 
but for the purpose of manifesting to the world, through 
the medium of the elect church, (who were the chosen 
vessels of mercy,) the glory and excellency of that king- 
dom which was then set up in the earth, and into which 
" all Israel, with the fulness of the Gentile" world, were 
ultimately to be gathered. Although for the time being, 
they were many of them, and particularly the Jews, ves- 
sels of wrath, fitted to destruction, and did afterwards ac- 
tually suffer that destruction for which they were fitted, by 
having filled up the measure of their iniquities, when wrath 
came upon them to the uttermost ; when Jerusalem was 
destroyed, their temple burnt to ashes, their government 
subverted, and they scattered among all nations to reap 
the bitter fruits of their own evil doings. Although it is 
said, " Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated," yet we 
are not to understand this hatred to be positive, but com- 
parative : the same as where our Saviour says, " if any 
man come unto me and hate not father and mother, and 
wife and children, and brethren and sisters, yea, and his 
own life also, he cannot be my disciple." Luke xiv : 26. 
See this explained in Matt, x : 37. If the temporary fall- 
ing away, or rejection of Israel, or the vessels of wrath 
were intended to signify their eternal damnation, and end- 
less exclusion from bliss, the apostle would hardly have 
said, " Have they stumbled that they should fall ? God 
forbid: but rather through their fall, salvation is come 
untoxthe Gentiles to provoke them to jealousy." Nor 
would he have proceeded immediately to predict their final 
and universal ingathering and salvation. See Eom. xi: 
from the 11th verse to the end. If the framers of your 
Confession of Faith had not handled the word of God de- 
ceitfully, when they quoted verse 33, of this chapter, " 0, 
the depth of the riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge 



S8 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



of God!" &c., they would never have adduced it as proof 
of the consolation of saints, arising from a belief in the 
doctrine of election and reprobation, and preceded it with 
another text from the ninth chapter, that has no connexion 
with it : but they would have adduced it as proof of the joy 
and consolation, arising from a belief in the final salvation 
of all Israel, together with the fulness of the Gentiles, and 
would have quoted from the apostle the verse preceding it, 
on which the joyful and exulting strain of St. Paul was 
founded, viz : For God hath concluded them all in unbe- 
lief, that he might have mercy upon all. O, the depth of 
the riches," &c. 

Again, had not the framers of your Confession been 
straitened even for apparent proof of election and repro- 
bation, or had they been willing the Scriptures should go 
ungarbled, and speak for themselves, they never would 
have given so partial an exhibition of the doctrine con- 
tained in the first chapter of Ephesians, quoting the 9th 
and 11th verses, and designedly leaving out the 10th, which 
is so essential to the true understanding of the other. I 
will here quote the 9th, 10th, and 11th verses, putting the 
middle verse, which your Confession leaves out, in italics, 
and leave you and my readers to judge of the importance 
of the 10th verse : Having made known unto us the 
mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which 
he hath purposed in himself ; that in the dispensatioQi of 
the fulness of times^ he might gather together in one^ all 
things in Christy both ichich are in heaven and lohich are 
^on earth, even in him, in whom also we have obtained an 
inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose 
of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his 
own will." Now, Sir, I appeal to your own candor and 
good sense, whether the 10th verse is not the very key to 
the proper understanding of the other two verses ? whether 
the universal ingathering of all things in Christ, the head 
of every man, is not the very thing embraced in the " mys- 
tery of God's will," which he had " made known" to the 
apostles and primitive disciples ?— and whether they had 
not already, by faith, obtained and entered into the enjoy- 
ment of that inheritance which it was revealed to them 
should ultimately be enjoyed by all mankind ; so that they 
were a kind of first fruits unto God, denoting what the 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



59 



whole harvest would be, in the end, when all should be 
gathered in ? For " if the first fruit be holy, the lump is 
also holy." 

Again, when you quote and endeavor to explain the text, 
" Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump 
to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto disho- 
nor you seem to forget all analogy, and lay reason and 
experience entirely aside, in order to make the text coun- 
tenance your views. Did you ever know a potter make a 
vessel but what he designed for some good use ? Some, 
to'.be sure, are applied to more honorable uses than others, 
but I presume you never saw a potter make one that he 
had no use for ; much less did you ever know a potter to 
make a vessel on purpose to he angry at it as long as he 
lived ! " The vessel that the potter made of clay was 
marred in the hand of the potter ; so he made it again, 
another vessel, as seemed good, {not as it seemed evU^) to 
the potter to make it." You also seem to forget that it is 
said, respecting some who were for a season considered 
vessels of wrath, " I will call them my people which were 
not my people, and her beloved which was not beloved. 
And it shall come to pass, in the place where it was said, 
Ye are not my people, there shall they be called the chil- 
dren of the living God." 

In short, Sir, all the passages commonly adduced in sup- 
port of the gloomy doctrine under examination, are either 
misapplied, or perverted from their natural import, and 
explained contrary to the analogy of things, and the gene- 
ral tenor of Scripture ; and hence the doctrine is anti- 
scriptural as well as God-dishonoring. 

Yours, &c. 



LETTER X. 



The same subject continued. 

Sir — It is a rule with me, and one which I think ought 
to be adopted by all protestant Christians, to admit no doc- 
trine as undoubtedly true, but such as are clearly and une- 
quivocally taught in the Bible ; much less to admit as true, 
without this sanction, a doctrine so strange and extraordi- 
nary, so cruel and barbarous, so much at variance with 
reason and common sense, so monstrous and derogatory 
to the divine character, as that under consideration. 

In my last, I showed that the principal texts of Scripture 
commonly adduced in support of your doctrine of election 
and reprobation, are most grossly perverted, misapplied, 
and wrested from their obvious intention, whenever they 
are made to countenance such a doctrine ; and that, by no 
fair construction can they be made to yield it the least sup- 
port. I also showed that those texts, in connexion with 
their contexts, and the general tenor of Scripture, went to 
support a far more glorious and beautiful theory ; one that 
is highly honorable to the divine Being, showing him to 
be impartially good and affectionate to all his children, and 
purposing their ultimate holiness and happiness. Indeed, 
it is impossible that a revelation coming from God, can 
teach a doctrine so derogatory to the divine character, so 
hostile to reason, and so entirely at war with all nature, as 
the Presbyterian, or Calvinistic doctrine of election and 
reprobation. And a rational and enlightened mind would 
sooner believe that the Bible was a sheer fabrication, a 
bundle of absurdity and falsehood, than that a true reve- 
^ lation from God could teach a doctrine so monstrous as 
this — one that nature pronounces false in every chapter 
and section of her ample page. And hence it is, that so 
many good men have been driven into skepticism, and 
finally rejected Christianity altogether. Being taught to 
believe that Calvinism was the doctrine of the Bible — not 
giving themselves leisure to examine the word of life for 
themselves, but taking on trust what they heard from the 
pulpit, — through a perversion of the Scriptures, and the 



1 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



61 



deceptive mode of handling the word of God, practised by 
learned clergymen, these men, of naturally strong and good 
minds, have abandoned Christianity entirely ; justly con- 
cluding, if the Bible taught such a doctrine, it could not 
be of God, it were unworthy of its reputed author. Where- 
as, if they had searched the Scriptures attentively for them- 
selves, without regard to the interpretations of Calvinistic 
Doctors, they would have found them worthy of all ac- 
ceptation, and' that the doctrine of election and reprobation 
formed no part of the system of divinity therein taught. 
And I verily believe that Calvinism is the fruitful source 
of the extensively prevailing infidelity in our country. 

By the quotations I have already made from your Con- 
fession of Faith, we perceive that you hold and maintain, 
that God foreordained whatever comes to pass — that he 
decreed the sin of our first parents, and annexed the pen- 
alty of infinite and endless torment to the effect of his own 
decree — that by his decree, some men and angels are 
(elected from this apparently common ruin of all) predes- 
tinated to everlasting life, and others foreordained to ever- 
lasting death, and their number is so certain and definite, 
that it cannot be either increased or diminished — that the 
elect were chosen or elected from all eternity, and that 
without any foresight of faith or good works in them — 
that the elect are redeemed by Christ, effectually called, 
and will infallibly be saved — that none others, but the elect 
only, are redeemed, or effectually called ; none others can 
be saved, though they be ever so diligent to frame their 
lives according to the best light they have — that there are 
elect infants, (and probably idiots,) and these also will be 
regenerated and saved by Christ ; and as the elect only are 
redeemed, as they only can be saved, those infants not elect- 
ed, (for the mention of elect infants implies there are some 
not elected,) not being redeemed, cannot be saved ; they 
are of course reprobated, and foreordained to everlasting 
death, to the pains of hell forever. Thus, according to 
your theory, man is forced into existence without any act 
or volition of his own, goes through the world and does 
the best he can, and is then forced out of it, and doomed 
to the pains of a never-ending hell, for which he was fore- 
ordained long before he had a being ! Even tender infants 
^^at are barely born to the light, gasp once, and die, without 



62 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



knowing their right hand from their left, are hurried away^ 
(if they are not of the elect,) to groan in endless anguish, 
and be the companions of devils and damned spirits, world 
without end 1 

O ! my friend, is it possible that you can believe in such 
horrid notions as the above, which are so decidedly taught 
in your Confession of Faith ? Do pause, I beseech you, 
and consider — reflect seriously on the nature and tendency 
of such a theory, before you ever attempt to preach it again. 
But if you do in reality believe it, I w^ould ask again, how 
is it possible for you to believe at the same time, as you 
and your brethren often preach, the doctrine of free moral 
agency 1 If the number, and all the actions, and the final 
destiny of ihe elect and reprobates were fixed by an irre- 
vocable decree, long before they had a being, why be guilty 
of such a climax of absurdity as that of maintaining, that 
life and death, good and evil, are set before them ; that they 
can choose or refuse, and according to their choice will be 
their everlasting destiny ?— that if any perish, it is their 
own fault ? Why exhort people to be up and doing while 
the day lasts, for it will soon be forever too latel Why 
tell them to make their calling and election sure ? Why 
entreat them by all the joys of heaven, and all the terrors 
of hell, to repent and get religion, and come to Christ, 
while the day of grace lasts ? Do you believe it possible 
for one, that " God did, from all eternity, elect to everlast- 
ing life,'' to be eternally damned? No, Sir, you believe 
no such thing, if you believe your own creed. Well, do 
you believe there ever was, or ever will be, a day of grace 
with the reprobate — that there ever was, or ever will be, 
a time v/hen it were even possible for the non-elect to be 
saved 1 No : for none but the elect were redeemed — none 
others are effectually called — none others can be saved, if 
what I have quoted from your Confession be true. It were 
utterly impossible for one of the elect to be damned, or 
to fail of salvation, however vile his character may be, as 
it would be for him to dethrone Jehovah himself. It were 
as impossible for one of the reprobates to be saved, or to 
avoid endless damnation, be he ever so virtuous or good, as 
for a fish to drink up the whole ocean in which he swims. 

Why then do you, after setting a Calvinistic table, cover 
it with Arminian bread ? Why pretend that the eternal 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



63 



destiny of man depends on the exertions he here makes ? 
Why make such unwearied efforts to get up revivals of 
religion 1 Why tell your people, if they are saved, it must 
be through their own exertions to get religion ; and if they 
are damned, it is their own fault, because they have neg- 
lected the means of grace, sinned away the day of grace, 
&c. ? Why tell about the Heathen being exposed to end- 
less damnation, and hundreds and thousands of them daily 
sinking down to hell, all for lack of knowledge ? Now, 
you believe none of this stuff, if you believe your own 
creed. If your Confession of Faith expresses your real 
sentiments, you believe that all of the human family that it 
ever was, or ever will be possible should be saved, were 
unconditionally elected from all eternity, and not one of 
them possibly can be lost ; and all the rest were uncondi- 
tionally reprobated to endless misery, from all eternity, and 
not one of them possibly can be saved. What then can 
foe your motive in feeding the people with Arminian doc- 
trine, when you believe no such thing ? I cannot account 
for this inconsistency in your creed and preaching, except 
on one or the other of the two following suppositions : viz. 
1. That you are perfectly aware that an enlightened peo- 
ple do abhor from their very souls, and will not receive nor 
swallow barefaced Calvinism — that it is too grating both 
to their ears and hearts, to be admitted for one moment — 
that you would lose all your hearers, -if you preached it 
plainly, excepting a few dark-souled bigots and worship- 
pers of yourself, who as firmly believe in your infallibility, 
as ever a Roman Catholic did in that of the Papal See ; 
and therefore you find yourself obliged to cook it up in 
such a manner, mixing Arminian bread with it, and so in- 
terlarding it with the doctrine of free will, as to make it 
in some measure palatable to your hearers. Or 2. That 
you are perfectly bewildered by the absurdity and mysti- 
cism of your system — in as much confusion in your own 
mind, as the builders of Babel were in their language — and 
therefore do not know how to preach any better, or how to 
get along with such a heterogeneous mass of contradictory 
notions and doctrines in any other way than to preach Cal- 
vinism and Arminianism, either alternately, or mixed up 
together i just as the current shall chance to lead, or the 
humor happen to take you. For in reality these two doc- 



64 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIEIN. 



trines are as opposite to each other as antipodes, and can 
no more be made to harmonize, than oil and water can be 
made to unite or mingle together. 

I like to see men consistent — I like to see them honest — 
if they believe in Calvinism, let them preach Calvinism, 
pure and uncorrupted ; let them not adulterate it with Ar- 
minianism, and attempt to take a part of two systems so 
utterly irreconcilable, and to blend those things together 
which never can be united. 

Hovv'ever, on reflection and strict examination, Calvin- 
ism and Arminianism do not contradict one another any 
more than Calvinism contradicts itself. Take for example 
the language of your creed : " By their fall all mankind 
lost communion with God, are under his wrath and curse, 
and so made liable to all the miseries of this life, to death 
itself, and to the pains of hell forever." Now the mean- 
ing intended to be conveyed by this language, is, that by 
Adam's sin, or as a just penalty therefor, all mankind, 
witho-ut exception, were liable to all miseries, temporal and 
eternal, which would be no more than they justly deserved 
to suffer for this act. Then again you maintain that " every 
sin, both original and actual, doth in its own nature, bring 
guilt upon the sinner whereby he is bound over to the 
wrath of God, &:c., and so made subject to death with all 
miseries; spiritual, temporal and eternal," and that the 
damnation which reprobates will suffer, will " be for their 
sins infficted." Now who does not see the most palpable 
contradiction in the above ? For if, as the first quotation 
expresses it, " all mankind were liable to all the miseries 
of this life, to death itself, and the pains of hell forever" 
as a just penalty for Adam's sin, it must be plain that none 
of Adam's posterity can ever suffer, or even be liable to 
suffer any sort of punishment for their oivn sins, for all 
that they can endure, both here and hereafter, in time and 
eternit3^ is only a just punishment for the sin of their 
2)rogenitor ; so that it will be utterly impossible to punish 
ihem for their own actual transgressions. Again : your 
Catechism asserts that " God did from all eternity elect 
some to everlasting life," &c. &:c. Now tell me, de^r Sir, 
how these some," that were from all eternity elected to 
everlasting life, could be, as stated above, " liable— iQ the 
pains of hell for ever?" Just as liable to these pains of 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



65 



heli, as the eternal and irrevocable decree of Jehovah was 
to be broken, and no more I 

But, Sir, aside from the fact already shown, that your 
system contradicts the Scriptures, contradicts other doc- 
trines which you attempt to blend with it, and contradicts 
itself, in the most palpable manner ; the monstrous par- 
tiality, the infinite cruelty, and the unparalleled tyranny, 
that the doctrine of particular election and reprobation as- 
cribes to the Father of the spirits of all flesh, ought to 
lead you and every rational mind, not only to doubt its 
truth, but to reject it with abhorrence, as totally unworthy 
of its pretended origin, or supposed divine authority, or 
of the reception or credence of any enlightened soul of 
Adam's num.erous race. Why, Sir, it is impossible in the 
nature of thmgs, to depict or conceive of a worse, or a 
more odious character than that which this doctrine as- 
cribes to our heavenly Father. It is even worse than that 
which is commonly ascribed to the devil himself. It is 
worse even than you believe the devil to be. For neither 
you nor any other one, that I know of, ever ascribed to 
that evil being the barbarous SiCiof creating 07i purpose to 
torment^ to all eternity. But your doctrine of election 
and reprobation does ascribe such an act to God. Accord- 
ing to this theory, God had no other motive in creating the 
reprobate, but to torment him to all eternity with infinite 
cruelty for the gratification of himself and other beings, 
called saints, almost, though not quite, as bad as himself. 
In my opinion, it would be a libel on the character of the 
devil to accuse him of such deeds of infinite malice as 
this ! God is therefore represented to be as much worse 
than the devil as his power is greater. 

This I say, dear Sir, in all due charity and good will to 
you ; for it is not yourself that I abhor and detest, (for I 
have a real friendship and regard for you,) but it is your 
doctrine — that is the abominable thing that my soul hateth. 
I have charity for you, and for many others that embrace 
your system of doctrines, and verily believe that there are 
many of them that are sincere, that are truly devotional 
and pious ; though their piety does by no means arise from 

their system their hearts are far better than their heads. 

But I believe you and they are deceived, deluded, bewil- 
dered. Therefore I thus speak, and would fain undeceive 

6^ 



66 



LETTERS TO EEV. S. C. AIKIN. 



you and them, if it were in my power. It was doubtless 
for this purpose, and with this motive, that an eminent 
divine, once a believer in the system, speaks in the follow- 
ing forcible and pointed language of the abominations of 
that doctrine, and warns his fellow-men against it. The 
extract is from one of Llewellin's tracts. [See Monthly Re- 
view, enlarged, vol. viii. 1792.] He writes thus : — 

" I challenge the whole body and being of moral evil 
itself, to invent, or inspire, or whisper any thing blacker or 
more wicked ; yea, if sin itself had all the wit, the tongues 
and pens of all men and angels to all eternity, I defy the 
whole to say any thing worse of God than this. O sin, 
thou has spent and emptied thyself in the doctrine of John 
Calvin ! And here I rejoice that I have heard the utmost 
that malevolence itself shall ever be able to say against 
infinite benignity ! I was myself brought up and tutored 
in it, and being delivered and brought to see the evil and 
danger, am bound by my obligations to God, angels and 
men, to warn my fellow-sinners ; I, therefore, here before 
God and the whole universe, recall and condemn every 
word I have spoken in favor of it. I thus renounce the 
doctrine as the rancor of devils, a doctrine, the preaching 
of which is babbling and mocking, its prayers blasphemies, 
and whose praises are the horrible yeliings of sin and hell." 

Though the above language is strong, plain, and severe, 
yet in general I think it correct; and verily believe the 
writer was an honest man. He had been trained up in 
the embrace and belief of Calvinism : and when its odious 
and dreadful features were clearly seen and known, he like 
an honest man, renounced and condemned it at once. — 
And I would now say to you, dear Sir, in the affectionate 
language of Jesus to the lawyer, " go thou and do like- 
wise." 

In my next, I shall commence the examination of the 
doctrine of endless misery. 

Affectionately Yours. 



LETTER XI. 



On the doctrine of Endless Misery, 

Dear Sir — I have in some measure anticipated the dis« 
cussion of this doctrine. In my remarks on the doctrines 
of " the fall," " total depravity," " election and reproba- 
tion," &c., I took occasion to point out their absurdity, 
inconsistency, want of scriptural support, their opposition 
to every noble and exalted conception of the divine Being, 
the monstrous cruelty and barbarity they ascribe to himj 
&;c. &c., but what principally gave them this character and 
appearance, was, the fact of their all pointing out, and ne- 
cessarily leading to, the doctrine of never ending misery — ■ 
this is the ultima thule, the final termination, the climax 
of all those doctrines, on which I have animadverted. — 
Had they not terminated here, they would be far less ex- 
ceptionable than I now view them to be. They might 
have been borne, and even admitted in a certain sense, had 
they not aimed at the establishment of this, of ail doctrines 
ever invented by men, the most cruel, pernicious and God- 
dishonoring. Give me any thing, even the wildest vaga- 
ries ever conceived by a diseased imagination, rather than 
the doctrine of endless damnation ; a doctrine which alike 
robs God of his glory and parental character, Jesus of his 
triumph and joy, the Gospel of its chief and crowning ex- 
cellence, and man of all rational enjoyment here, and the 
hope of immortal felicity beyond the grave. 

I know this doctrine is a darling part of your theory, 
and is clung to with more than ordinary tenacity by your- 
self and the clergy of your stamp, because this is the prin- 
ciple instrument employed to frighten weak-minded men, 
women and children, into a profession of your other dog- 
mas, and to drive those into your church whom otherwise 
you could not persuade to join. 

The principal sources on which you rely for the support 
of this doctrine, are, 1. The prejudices and traditions of 
the people ; who have for a few centuries past been taught 
from their infancy to receive this notion as the sine qiui 
non of the Christian faith ; and hence, the doctrine, though 



68 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIX. 



evidently unreasonable, is taken for granted by the gene- 
rality of people, and supposed to be true because their 
fathers believed it, and their grandfathers before them. 
And 2, as the natural consequence of these prejudices and 
traditions, a false mode of interpreting the Scriptures has 
been generally adopted ; and I am sorry to say, the clergy 
in general seem to be too fond of continuing this errone- 
ous practice — the doctrine being taken for granted, or sup- 
posed to be undoubtedly true, the question has been uni- 
formly begged, and the word of God has been wrested 
and made to bend to its support. Where no such doctrine 
was intended, or even thought of by the sacred writers, 
their figurative language has been seized and tortured into 
a supposed countenance of endless damnation. For this 
purpose, the parahles. as also the most obscure and hyper- 
bolic language in the Bible, and the w^ord hell^ are most 
frequently mentioned and mainly relied on. I shall here 
mention a few^ examples of this kind. 

Wherever the phrase hell, or hell fire, occurs, it is at 
once taken for granted that nothing else could be intended 
but a lake of fire, burning with brimstone, in the invisible 
world. Whereas nothing could be more wide from the 
true meaning of the phrase. The Jev;s, particularly the 
inhabitants of Jerusalem, to whom this language was al- 
most invariably addressed,w^hen used by our Saviour, w^ere 
as perfectly familiar with the place called hell, and with 
the sight of hell fire, as the inhabitants of the city of New- 
York are with w^hat is called the lattery ; for the most of 
them had been there and seen it as often. Hell, where it 
is translated from the Greek, Gehenna, signified literally, 
the valley of Hinnom near Jerusalem, w^here a fire was 
constantly kept burning, by which to consume the filth 
and dead carcasses carried out from the city. Again, 
where the word hell occurs as translated from the Greek 
word, had.es, you make no distinction between it and the 
same v/ord w^hich is from Gehenna, carrying this as erro- 
neously as the other into the eternal world, and making it 
signify eiidless iornmit. Whereas, the word hades literally 
signified the grave, as w^hen Jacob, Job, and others prayed 
that they might go there ; but figuratively, mental dark- 
ness, trouble of mind, remorse of conscience, &c., which 
was what David alluded to when he said, " the pains of 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



69 



hell gat hold on me," and " thou hast delivered my soul 
from the lowest hell." 

Where St. Peter says, 1 Epistle iv : 18, if the righte- 
ous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the 
sinner appear?" it is at once supposed that he is speaking 
of the eternal salvation of one part of the human family 
in another world, and means to imply that the " ungodly 
and the sinner" will be consigned to remediless and end- 
less torment. But this is evidently a most preposterous 
conclusion ; for the apostle, after speaking of the judg- 
ment of the " house of God," or of the body of believers, 
as having already commenced, and of the comparative 
severity of the judgment on believers, and that which was 
shortly to come on the unbelieving and persecuting Jews, 
speaks, not of the eternal, but of the temporal salvation, 
or deliverance of the disciples from the more dreadful ca- 
lamities that would befal their ungodly persecutors, when 
the measure of their iniquities being full, wrath should 
come upon them to the uttermost,and such tribulation in the 
destruction of Jerusalem as had never been since there 
was a nation, no, nor ever should be again. See 1 Peter 
iv : 17, 18, and 2 Thess. i : 6-10, compared with Matt, 
xvi : 27, 28, xxiv : 3, 13-21, 30-35, and indeed the whole 
of Matthew xxiv and xxv ; Mark viii : 38, and ix : 1 ; 
Luke ix : 26, 27, and other parallel texts, showing the time 
of the coming of the Son of man in judgment upon that 
generation, and the fulfilment of his denunciations, by the 
Roman army, the messengers of God's vengeance upon 
the wicked Jews. 

The parables also, many of which were undoubtedly 
designed to apply to the same events above alluded to, (as 
for example, that of the house-holder and vineyard, and 
that of the marriage of the king's son, Matt, xxi and xxii,) 
are equally perverted from their original design, w^hen car- 
ried out of this world into the invisible. The parable of 
the lokeat and the tares is commonly explained so as to 
make it represent the righteous and the wicked here, and 
a final and eternal separation hereafter, when an infinite 
and endless difference will be made between the different 
classes of the human family. But the least reflection must 
satisfy a man of your discriminating mind, of the incor- 
rectness of this exposition. For this would make the devil 



70 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



the creator of a part of the human family as much as it 
is said that the enemy that sowed the tares, is the devil ; 
and if this be admitted, it must likewise be granted that 
they are in duty bound to serve and obey the devil ; as the 
Scriptures direct, " children obey your parents in all 
things." If the devil is really the father of any, they are 
bound to obey him, and him only. God can have no claim 
whatever on their obedience, or service ! Not only does 
this exposition involve the above absurdity, but in conjunc- 
tion with other parts of your scheme, it supposes that 
wheat can be turned into tares^ and tares into ivheat ; an 
instance of which would be a prodigy indeed in the natu- 
ral w^orld. Again, it confounds the seed with the field, 
which I have no doubt our Saviour meant to have kept 
distinct and separate. I have no doubt that Jesus here 
meant to treat of the same general subject that he had 
been treating of in the preceding parable of the soiver and 
the seed, but to present it in a new light or different point of 
view. In the parable of sower and seed, he exhibits a 
view of the obstacles that existed in the world, to the intro- 
duction or establishment of his Gospel among men, and in 
that of the ivheat and tares, showed w^hat difficulties would 
arise after it teas introduced, in consequence of the intro- 
duction of false doctrines into the church while men 
slept," or were off their guard. The field was the world 
of mankind ; the good seed was the Gospel of truth ; the 
tares were false doctrines sown by the enemy; (as we are 
informed the devil is the father of lies ;) the harvest was 
to be in the end of the age (not kosmos, world, but aion, 
age) or dispensation, or whenever the crop should become 
ripe for the harvest, and the false doctrines be clearly dis- 
tinguishable from the true ; (which was not the case in 
their incipient stages;) then should the reapers, or mes- 
sengers of the Gospel covenant, thrust in their sharp sickles 
and reap the harvest ; truth should be secured and saved, 
but the tares or false doctrines, should be bound in bundles 
by the strong cords of truth, and burned by the fire of free 
investigation ; notwithstanding the votaries of error and 
falsehood might wail, and gnash their teeth, and gnaw 
their tongues for pain ; as was the case with the church 
of Rome when Luther began to bind her tares in bundles 
and bnrn them ; and as is the case, even now, with most 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



71 



of the clergy when some of their darling tenets or rank 
errors are brought to the fiery ordeal of strict and critical 
investigation. The doctrine of endless misery is one of 
those rank and pernicious tares, sown by the enemy of 
human happiness, which must be rooted out, however 
much the process may disturb or outrage the votaries of 
the error. 

I here take the liberty of introducing to your notice, an 
extract from the writings of the learned, critical, and amia- 
ble Dr. Belsham, of London, on the doctrine of endless 
punishment. Though I may differ from him in some minute 
particulars, yet in the main I agree with him, and think 
his arguments conclusive and absolutely irresistible against 
endless misery, and in favor of the final happiness of all 
mankind. I hope, dear Sir, you will weigh well his argu- 
ments. They are the following : — 

Concerning the duration of future punishment, some 
have maintained, that the future sufferings of the wicked 
shall be eternal*; others, that after a limited period, they 
will terminate in annihilation ; and others, that the ten- 
dency and design of future punishment, is the reformation 
of the sufferer,, who vv^ill ultimately be raised to perfect 
and everlasting felicity. 

" The arguments in support of the dismal doctrine of 
the eternal duration of the future sufferings of the wicked, 
are the following : 1. Sin being committed against an infi- 
nite Being, is an infinite evil, and therefore worthy of 
infinite punishment. 

This is an unintelligible and gratuitous assumption ; 
it supposes that God has some other end in view in pun- 
ishing the wicked, than reformation and example — i. e. 
that God is a tyrant. The simple fact that mankind are 
limited in all their powers and faculties, is a sufficient re- 
futation of the doctrine of infinite sin. It is hardly good 
logic to affirm, that a limited being, can perform an un- 
limited act, either good or evil. It would be the same as 
saying that the stream can rise higher than its fountain — 
which is a gross absurdity. We being limited in power, 
our acts, and their consequences must also be limited, or 
there is injustice somewhere. 

" 2. It urges that the doctrio© of the ererlasting suffer- 
ings of the wicked, is expressly revealed in the Scriptures, 



72 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



and has been the prevailing belief of Christians of all ages. 

" Answer 1. If this doctrine be true, then there is an 
infinite disproportion between the offence and the punish- 
ment — a finite being, for a finite offence, in a finite time, 
is punished with infinite and unending misery ! ! ! 

" 2. If this doctrine be true, then God makes his crea- 
tures eternally miserable, for the commission of offences, 
which were the foreknoivn^ and therefore the necessary^ or 
inevitable result of the faculties which he has given them — 
of the circumstances in which he has placed them — of the 
frailty of that nature which he himself imparted^ — and the 
temptations to which, in the course of his providence, they 
have been exposed. That is, mankind act as he foresaw 
they would, and the consequence is, he torments them 
world without end. 

" 3. If this doctrine be true, and if it also be true that 
a majority of mankind are vicious characters, the Gospel 
revelation, so far from being good tidings of great joy to 
all people, w^ould fill the world with terror and dismay. 
What ! shall we be told, that the Gospel reveals the doc- 
trine of the unutterable and never-ending torments of a 
large portion of the offspring of the Most High, and can 
we call it a message of gladness ? Can we believe it to 
be that better covenant, of which the apostle speaks, if it 
brings to light ideas infinitely more cruel than those which 
urged a Nero or a Caligula on to deeds of darkness and 
blood? 

" 4. A doctrine so improbable in itself, so apparently 
inconsistent with all the rational and encouraging appre- 
hensions of the divine attributes and government — so ter- 
rible in its consequences, is not to be admitted but upon 
evidence the most direct, unequivocal, and irresistible. 

" 5. The Scriptures are so far from teaching this formi- 
dable doctrine, that there is not a single text in any of the 
authentic, prophetic or apostolic writings, which can, by 
any fair and rational construction, be made even to express 
the idea. This will appear evident, if we pass to the ex- 
amination of the supposed evidences from the Scriptures, 
of the doctrine which is now under consideration. 

" Matt, xiii : 18. " It is better to enter into life halt or 
maimed, than having two hands, or two feet, to be cast 
into everlasting fire verse 9. " into hell fire," literally. 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



73 



the valley of Hinnom. See 2 Chron. xxviii : 3, also Jer. 
vii: 31,32. 

" These passages only express the permanence of the 
place, and of the instruments of punishment, and are more 
applicable to a continual succession of criminals^ than to 
individual sufferers. The place was the valley of Hin- 
nom, situated in the immediate vicinity of Jerusalem, 
where a fire was kept almost perpetually burning. Into 
this place the carcasses of beasts were thrown, upon which 
the worms preyed. So that ' the worm died not, and the 
fire was not quenched,' but kept burning night and day. 
The Saviour is here quotiong the language of Isaiah, and 
is prophesying the temporal calamities about to fall upon 
the Jewish nation. The figure of fire was common to the 
writers of that period, when speaking of the judgments of 
God. In the closing verse of Isaiah it is said, 'and they 
shall go forth,' that is, from Jerusalem to the valley of 
Hinnom — ' and shall look upon the carcasses of the men 
(the Jews) that have transgressed against me ; for their 
worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched, 
and they shall be an abhorring to all flesh.' This must 
be allowed to refer to temporal judgments — for they were 
to look upon the carcasses of those who had transgressed 
against God — not to look upon them in another world, but 
in the valley of Hinnom, where the bodies of no less than 
six hundred thousand transgressors were cast during the 
siege by the Romans — * where their worm died not, and 
their fire was not quenched.' The passage does not mean 
that ihey were to be tormented in this place eternally, but 
that their dead bodies would be cast into this common re- 
ceptacle of filth, to be consumed. See also Mark ix : 43- 
48. The prophet and the Saviour use almost precisely 
the same language — it was addressed to the same people — 
and meant the same thing, viz. their temporal destruction. 
We cannot suppose that the prophets intended one thing 
and Christ another, and that too entirely different, when 
they both use the same language. 

" Mark iii : 29. ' But he that shall blaspheme against 
the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of 
eternal damnation.' This text pronouncing eternal dam- 
nation upon those who shall blaspheme the Holy Spirit, is 
explained by the parallel passage in Matt, xii : 32. ' It 



74 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



shall not be forgiven him neither in this world (literally, 
age) nor in the world {age) to come.' The meaning is, 
that no provision is made for the recovery of those who 
reject not only the miracles of Christ, but the more public 
and splendid ones of the apostles after his resurrection. 
Their sin was not taken away — and they remained in the 
same unhappy condition in which Christianity found them. 
They have not forgiveness to the age. 

" 2 Thess. i : 9. ' Who shall be punished with ever- 
lasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from 
the glory of his power — in that day.' The apostle is here 
speaking of the tribulation which God should recompense 
to those that troubled them. These we find (see 1 Thess.) 
v/ere the Jews who crucified the Lord Jesus — who pleased 
not God and were contrary to all men. They were to be 
punished with everlasting destruction from the presence 
of the Lord. This could not be done by consigning them 
to hell ; for David says, " if I ascend up to heaven thou 
art there ; if I make my bed in hell thou art there.'^ The 
presence of the Lord was at Jerusalem, and the temple 
was filled with the glory of his powder. The Jews were 
to be destroyed as a nation v/ith an everlasting destruction ; 
were to be banished from Jerusalem where was the pre- 
sence of the Lord, and from the temple w4iere was the 
glory of his power. 

" Matt. XXV : 46. ' And these shall go away into ever- 
lasting punishment.' The phrase ' everlasting punish- 
ment,' properly signifies everlasting correction ; that is, a 
correction that will last as long as any thing remains to be 
corrected. It signifies suffering inflicted for the benefit of 
the sufferer ; and if any conclusion on so important a point 
is to be drawn from verbal criticism, this text is most favora- 
ble to the doctrine of universal salvation. 

L The doctrine of universal salvation maintains that 
the v/icked will sufier in a future life — that their sufferings 
will be remedial ; that the design and tendency of them 
will be to purify the character from those vicious habits 
which have been contracted in the present state — that to 
this end they must necessarily be very severe, being in- 
tended to purify the character from those moral stains 
which would not yield to the discipline of this life ; that 
consequently the intensity of their sufferings will be in 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



75 



exact proportion to the depravity of their character, but 
that all will terminate in the total extinction of vice, and 
in the ultimate recovery of every individual to virtue and 
happiness. 

" The arguments in favor of universal salvation, are 
1. The infinite goodness of God. The tokens of his good- 
ness are displayed on every hand. Every object upon 
which we cast our eyes, proves that ' the Lord is good 
and doeth good continually.' Add to this that he is un- 
changeable, and we have a foundation for our hope, immu- 
table as the promises of Jehovah. 

II. The impartiality of that goodness. If God is im- 
partial ; has no respect to persons ; if one of his creatures 
is made happy, the same benevolence that secures the 
happiness of one, will secure the happiness of all. But 
it may be objected that this argument proves too much. 
It would extend to brutes. We answer, that if the brutal 
creation have a ' pleasing hope, a fond desire, a longing 
after immortality,' then the argument does extend to them, 
and not without. If they have no wish, no desire for 
eternal life, then they lose nothing if it is not bestowed 
upon them. 

" III. The perfect happiness of God is a kind of pledge 
that his creatures will be happy. 

" IV. All, or by far the greater part of the evils we know^ 
are remedial, therefore by analogy all are so. 

" V. God doth not keep his anger forever. In judgment 
he remembereth mercy ; and his mercy endureth forever. 

" VI. God is the Father and Benefactor of his creatures, 
he must therefore intend their ultimate happiness ; and as 
he is all powerful and all wise, our final happiness is as 
certain as there is a sun in heaven. 

" VII. The dispensations of God to the Jewish nation, 
are symbolical of his dispensations to mankind in general, 
and to every individual in particular. But the Jews are 
now rejected with a view to their being ultimately resto- 
red, so likewise are impenitent sinners. 

" VIII. Facts plainly revealed, and admitted by all Chris- 
tians, cannot be reconciled with the divine perfections, 
upon any other supposition but that of universal salvation. 
1. That the number of those who will escape future pun- 
ishment is comparatively small, and the way to life narrow 



76 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



and difBcult. 2. That the wicked will be raised to suffer- 
ing is a circumstance in the highest degree incredible, and 
contrary to all experience and analogy, and the reverse of 
every thing we should expect from the divine goodness, if 
they are not intended for ultimate happiness.^ 3. That 
these sufferings will be very severe and intense, and of 
indefinite duration. 4. That the sufferings of the wicked 
will be in exact proportion to their demerits and their 
crimes. All this is wise, and right, and even necessary, 
if the doctrine of universal salvation be true ; but upon 
any other supposition those facts are utterly inexplicable 
and incredible. See Hartley on Man, Part II. c. iv. §5." 

Thus far Dr. Belsham. In my next I shall resume the 
consideration of this subject. Yours, &c. 



LETTER XII. 

The same subject continued. 

Dear Sir — In my last I pointed out to you the unscriptu- 
ral character of this doctrine, and showed that it was only 
by a misapplication or perversion of the word of God that 
any texts could be made to favor it in the least. It was 
also shown to be entirely disproportioned to the sins of 
finite creatures, for a finite or limited time, as well as a 
variance with every noble and exalted and worthy concep- 
tion of the divine Being. I wish now to call your atten- 
tion again to the subject, and introduce some further con- 
siderations to your notice. 

And in the first place, I wish to inquire what can be the 
motive in the infliction of endless punishment ? Is the 
motive good ? and will the good designed, ultimately be 
effected by it ? I presume you maintain, with your other 
brethren, that if endless misery be inflicted on any, God is 
the being who will inflict it. And you doubtless hold that 

*The Doctor, it appears, believes in a state of disciplinary chastise- 
ment between death and the resurrection — but that none will be mis€* 
rable after they are raised from the dead* 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



77 



whatever God does, he does to some good end or other. 
What then, is the end designed by endless punishment? 
Is it, can it be, a good end ? In answering this, or rather 
these queries, I will first avail myself of a laconic, but, as 
I conceive, lucid and irresistible argument employed by one 
of the most brilliant geniuses that shone during the last 
/ century ; one of the brightest sons and ornaments of sci- 
ence and virtue that the kingdom of Great Britain ever 
produced.^ The following are his words : — 

" I lay it down as an indubitable maxim, that whatso- 
ever is done by a Being of divine attributes, is attended 
by his goodness, conducted by his wisdom, and accom- 
plished by his power, to a good end. Now all possible 
good ends may be enumerated under three words — honor 
—PLEASURE— BENEFIT ; and overy one to whom good can 
accrue from endless punishment, must be either punisher^ 
punished, or fellow-creature to the punished. Let us try 
every one of the former three to each of the latter. 

^' 1. The punisher. Would it be greater honor to the 
punisher to have his creatures forever miserable than hap- 
py ? I will venture to say by proxy, for every heart, No. 
Would it be greater pleasure ? No. And benefit, to him 
there can be none. 

" 2. The punished. Endless punishment can be neither 
honor, pleasure, nor benefit to them, though punishment on 
my scheme, (for the purpose of producing repentance and 
reformation,) will be of endless benefit. 

" 3. The fellow-creature to the punished. It will be as 
lioNORABLE to them as to have one of their family hanged ! 
If they have pleasure in it, they must have a diabolical 
heart, and by the just Searcher of hearts be committed to 
the place prepared for the devil and his angels. Benefit 
they can have none, except safety ; and that is fully an- 
swered by the great gulf, by confinement till the reforma- 
tion. 

" As then unceasing torments can answer no possible 
good to any one in the universe, I conclude them to be nei- 
ther the will nor the work of God. Could I suppose them, 
I must believe them to be inflicted by a wantonness and 
cruelty which words cannot express, nor heart conceive." 



* John Henderson, Esq. 

7^ 



78 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKlN. 



Now, friend Aikin, I wish you to weigh the above ar- 
gument candidly, examine it seriously, and see whether it 
can be refuted or gainsaid. It is not for argument's sake, 
nor for the sake of victory or mastery that I ask this of 
you — it is for the sake of ascertaining, exhibiting, and un- 
derstanding the truth, and of testing a doctrine which I 
cannot believe you would still adhere to and promulgate, 
if you had ever examined it with sufficient attention, and 
brought it fully to the test of reason enlightened by reve- 
lation. 

Did you ever think, Sir, of the dreadfulness of the doc- 
trine — of the awfulness of the idea ? Endless misery ! 
endless misery ! ! interminable torments ! immortal ago- 
nies ! ! infinite and unceasing woes ! ! inflicted too by a 
being whose name, whose nature, whose very essence is 
love ! ! Clergymen of your order, not unfrequently say, 
" no tongue can describe, no pencil paint, no thought con- 
ceive, or mind imagine, the infinite and unending torments 
of the damned." And hence, the most terrific and awful 
descriptions of hell and damnation (though they fall infi- 
nitely short of the reality) are supposed to approach near- 
est to the truth, and of course are considered the best 
specimens of evangelical preaching. Hell is uncapt — the 
imagination is upon the stretch — the sulphurous stench is 
smelt — the flames are heard to flash around their devoted 
victims — their groans and shrieks are distinctly heard — 
the Almighty is seen in flaming vengeance — the pale vic- 
tims of his wrath (who were forced into life without their 
knowledge or consent, surrounded with temptations while 
here, and in consequence of the frailty of that nature God 
had given them, yielded to those temptations as Deity fore- 
saw, or rather decreed they should) are thrust down — 
down — down to the dark abodes of eternal despair — crush- 
ed with the weight of Almighty vengeance — tossed on the 
billowy surges — rolling in the liquid lava of hell's molten 
sea — racked with unutterable torment — shrieking in hope- 
less despair! ! There, days, months, years, and ages will 
circle away — ten thousand times ten thousand, and thou- 
sands of thousands of years and of ages will roll over 
their heads ; this number multiplied by all the stars that fill 
the skies ; this by all the sands on the sea shore ; this by 
all the drops of water in the ocean ; this by every spire of 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



79 



grass that grows when summer's radiance gilds the vale ; 
this by every leaf that flutters in the breeze ; and this last 
number multiplied by all the figures that would wind the 
earth from pole to pole ; and after having endured all this 
long and inconceivable series of ages on ages, of dire and 
ineffable torment, multiplied thrice ten thousand times into 
itself, these wretched victims will be but just beginning to 
begin their sufferings — but just entering on the portals of 
misery — will have to endure the same number of ages of 
torment, over and over, again ; and still the dark vaults 
of their prison, while echoing with their groans, will re- 
verberate with the awful sentence, " Eternity — eternity — 
ETERNITY of misery is before youV O my God ! and 
what is all this misery and protracted suffering for ? Is 
it to do God any good ? No. Is it to do the saints in hea- 
ven any good ? No ; for they must be worse than demons 
to derive pleasure from such a source. Is it to do any 
being in the whole universe any good ? No. What then 
is it for ? Why, k) glut the vindictive wrath, and satiate 
the unmerciful cruelty of — an Almighty tyrant ? We 
have heard of the cruelty of a Nero, a Caligula, and a 
Robespierre, and our blood has been chilled in its veins at 
the recital ; but what was the cruelty of these, compared 
to what this doctrine ascribes to the Father of the uni- 
verse ? We have heard the soul-chilling tales of barbarous 
cruelties inflicted by the savages of the Western wilds ; 
but what are the terrors and tortures of the Indian's toma- 
hawk and scalping knife, to the terrors and tortures of a 
never-ending hell ? We have heard of the almost incredi- 
ble cruelties of Mahommedans, Turks, Arabs, and Alge- 
rines, of Cannibals and Inquisitors, and we have heard of 
the slow flames that consumed Michael Servetus : but 
what are these cruelties, barbarities, and outrages — what 
are all the cruelties and sufferings inflicted and endured, 
throughout the wide world, from the morning of time to 
the present period, when compared with what you hold the 
Father of all 7nercies and God of all grace will inflict on 
his oivn offsprings in hell ? They are nothing, Sir, and 
Less than nothing in the comparison. They are, as of ne- 
cessity they must be, of short duration — they are soon 
ended at longest : but the sufferings of your hell are never 
to end ! They are to be ever increasing, and never ceasing ; 



80 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



and their unhappy subjects are to be ever destroying and 
never destroyed, ever dying and never dead ! ever burning 
and never consumed ! ! God is to exert his own omnipo- 
tence to keep them in being, that he may ever have some- 
thing to be angry at, and ever have the pleasure of tor- 
menting them; although they never injured him, nor had 
it in their power so to do— for " if thou sinnest what doest 
thou against him ? or if thy transgressions be multiplied, 
what doest thou unto him ? Thy wickedness may hurt a 
man as thou art ; and thy righteousness may profit the son 
of man." No mercy can ever reach them in that dismal 
abode — not even mercy enough to strike them from the scale 
of existence, and terminate their sufierings by annihilation. 

Such is the character of the being you profess to wor- 
ship ; whose cruelty as far exceeds the greatest cruelty 
ever exercised by the unfeeling tyrants of earth, as his 
power transcends theirs, or as eternity exceeds in duration 
the short life of a mortal here ; as far indeed as infinite ex- 
ceeds finite ; so that the greatest earthly cruelty is not even 
a shadow of the cruelty of your God ! 

But, Sir, can you worship in spirit — can you truly love 
such a being as this ? I answer unhesitatingly. No : it is 
impossible ! you may pretend to worship him — you may 
profess to love him, through a dread of his vengeance if 
you do not ; as the sycophant crouches to his haughty lord, 
and the slave to his cruel master ; but it cannot be the 
true, the free, the unconstrained and sincere homage and 
affection of the soul. True love to God is not constrained 
by the fear of hell : it is free and voluntary ; and the per- 
son who possesses it is able to say in the language of the 
apostle, "We love him because he ^r^^ loved us.'' But 
such a God as your creed embraces cannot be truly loved 
by any soul in the universe. I could not love him if I 
would,, and, I will here add, I itmuldnot love him if I could ; 
for the plain reason that such a being would be totally un- 
w^orthy of the love of a rational creature. But blessed be 
the God of heaven, no such being exists (as the God of 
infinite hatred and malice embraced in your creed) except 
in the bewildered brains of deluded mortals, and the wild 
chimeras of men's deceived imaginations. 

The God that does exist, is a Being of infinite love and 
benevolence, good unto all, and his tender mercies over all 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



81 



his works, kind to the unthankful and the evil, making* his 
sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sending his 
rain on the just and on the unjust : and inasmuch as this 
is his character now, and he is unchangeable, he will eter- 
nally remain the same benevolent Being. God is love : 
and he can no more cease to love a being that he has crea- 
ted, than he can cease to be God. If his children are sin- 
ful and disobedient, he punishes them, as a good earthly 
father punishes his children, for their good, for their profit, 
that they may be partakers of his holiness. But as end- 
less punishment could not possibly be for their profit or 
benefit, this could never be embraced in his plan of moral 
government or discipline. 

He loves his enemies, blesses those that curse him, 
does good to those that hate him ; and hence, Jesus com- 
mands his followers to do the same, that they may imitace 
their Father in heaven. But suppose mankind were to 
imitate the God which your creed holds up — were to hate 
and torment with merciless cruelty, all that they conceived 
to be their enemies, all that did not conform to their stan- 
dard in all things — What would be the consequences in 
society ? For an answer to this question, look to the enor- 
mities, the cruelties, and the unmerciful persecutions that 
have been practiced by the believers in a tyrannical God^ 
and the doctrine of endless misery ! 

Look to the oceans of blood that have been spilled, the 
millions on millions that have been slain by the persecuting 
advocates of an endless hell. And say too, whether they 
did not act consistently with their belief, and in conformity 
with the character of their God ? Did not John Calvin act 
perfectly consonant with his doctrine, when he caused Ser- 
vetus to be burned at the stake ? He conceived it his duty to 
hate whom he believed God hated : and as he believed God 
would burn Servetus to all eternity in the future world, 
he doubtless thought he could assist the Lord, by beginning 
the good work of burning here on earth ! We find that 
wherever persecution has raised her cruel standard, whether 
in the old or new world, the Eastern or Western conti- 
nent, the persecutors have been'staunch advocates for end- 
less misery. This was the case in our own country with 
those who hung Quakers, banished Baptists, and practiced 
many other cruelties in the early settlement of our country. 



82 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



But as the liberal laws and institutions of our country 
will not now allow such persecutions to be carried on; as the 
improvements of the age are constantly advancing; as 
more enlarged and liberal views of the divine Being are 
now generally entertained ; and as Christianity is becom- 
ing more and more disencumbered of those corruptions 
and false theories that were palmed upon her during the 
dark ages of popery, and to- which many protestants still 
adhere with great pertinacity ; from all these meliorating 
causes, the practice of professing Christians has been 
greatly altered for the better ; their habits, lives and hearts 
are much improved; so that I verily believe, that with a 
vast majority of those who profess to believe in the doc- 
trine of endless misery, their hearts are far better than 
their heads ; or rather, I will say, than their creeds. They 
cannot be so barbarous and cruel, as to act in accordance 
\vith w^hat their creeds ascribe to the Deity. And hence, 
I think it high time that your creed, which embraces the 
doctrine of endless damnation and infinite cruelty, a creed 
which is too wicked and barbarous to live by in the present 
age, was abandoned and given up forever. 
Yours, &c. 



LETTER XIII. 

On the doctrine of Fallen Angels and a Personal Devil. 

Dear Sir — When I wrote my last letter to you I did 
not intend so long a lapse of time should intervene between 
that and this epistle, as I now find has actually rolled away. 
I trust, however, your goodness will pardon the long de- 
lay, when I assure you it has not been for the w^ant of 
inclination on my part, to pursue the subject of discussion, 
but from the multiplicity, variety and pressing nature of 
my avocations. The topics, also, yet remaining to be dis- 
cussed, will possess the same interest, and hold the same 
importance now, that they would have done at any former 
period. 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



88 



The common doctrine of the fall, total depravity, elec- 
tion and reprobation, and endless misery, which have al- 
ready been examined, and, as is believed, fully refuted, iire 
considered as deeply interesting, when viewed in connex- 
ion with their advocates, influence and bearing on society 
and the happiness of men, as any doctrines can be ; yet 
the interest these doctrines are allowed to possess, will not 
detract from the importance of others now to be examined. 
In further pursuing my design, I shall first call your atten- 
tion to the common doctrine of fallen angels and a per- 
sonal devil. 

In order to come directly at the subject in hand, and treat 
it fairly, I will first state the doctrine as it is believed you, 
in common with other orthodox Presbyterians, hold it. 

The doctrine, so far as can be gathered from the preach- 
ing and writings of your order, is as follows : Not long 
previous to the creation of this earth and its first inhabi- 
tants, the devil, who was then an angel of the highest order 
in heaven, took offence at being commanded to worship 
the Son of God, rebelled against the Majesty of heaven, 
seduced a vast multitude of the heavenly host to join his 
standard, and after a long and desperate contest, was finally 
overcome by the allegiate powers, hurled from the battle- 
ments of heaven with his apostate associates, and doomed 
to the liquid flames and burning torments of endless dam- 
nation in hell — that this open rebel, (now an arch-fiend of 
hell,) with his subordinate wicked companions, found his 
way to this world, seduced our first parents to sin, and no w 
tempts mankind, and leads the way in all crimes and ini- 
quities that are perpetrated in all parts of the earth. 

How this rebel monster escaped from his chains and 
confinement in hell, and obtained footing in this world ; 
and how it happens that he is now the principal prisoner 
and keeper^ victini and tormentor, subject and sovereign in 
hell, while at the same time he is roaming at large through 
the whole earth and tempting, at the same moment of time 
in the four quarters thereof, hundreds of millions of human 
beings, is not explained ; nor are any efforts made by the 
believers in the theory, to explain it. But to call it in ques- 
tion, would be, in their estimation, almost as heinous an of- 
fence as to deny the existence even of the Supreme Be- 
ing himself. 



84 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



I am sensible, Sir, of the tenacity with which such 
strange, mystical, inexplicable and monstrous doctrines are 
held by the ignorant multitude, when once they get a foot- 
ing, have long been cherished, and are advocated by the 
clergy in whom they repose implicit and almost unlimited 
confidence. But it is lamentable to see men in your sta- 
tion, and of your enlightened and well cultivated mind, 
still countenancing and upholding such a monstrous theory 
as this, which should have been discarded centuries ago, 
and laid aside with other corruptions in the time of the 
reformation. The doctrine was evidently begotten by Pa- 
ganism, brought forth by the school of Plato, (in which 
Pagan mysticisms were artfully blended with a part of 
Christianity,) and matured in the poetic fancy of John 
Milton, allowing for the slight variations and modifications 
it underwent in the intermediate and subsequent stages of 
its existence. I have no doubt, however, of the fact, that 
many honest Christians really believe this doctrine is taught 
in the Bible, and hence, they receive it as a Scripture doe- 
trine, as they do many others that are merely traditional. 
Having heard it from their infancy, both from parents and 
ministers, their ideas of it are as old as any of their ideas — 
as ancient as their memories — and they really think they 
have got them from the perusal of their Bible : when in 
fact the Bible neither teaches nor mentions any such doc- 
trine. 

To satisfy yourself. Sir, that no such doctrine is taught 
in the Scriptures, I wish you to take your Bible and try 
to establish, from its positive testimony, either of the fol- 
lowing particulars : 1. That the devil was ever a holy 
angel. If so, 2. That he was ever commanded and refu- 
sed to worship the Son. 3. That any holy angels in hea- 
ven ever rebelled against their Maker, or were ever cast 
out of heaven into hell. 4. That they were ever doomed 
to endless misery there. 5. That these once holy, but 
now wicked angels, or the devil their leader, or any other 
personal being once in heaven, now roam through the 
whole earth tempting mankind to sin. I am satisfied, if 
you make the experiment, that you will be convinced, not 
only that the whole theory is not taught in the Bible, but 
that neither of these particulars can be found inculcated 
in that sacred volume. 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



I know of but four texts of Scripture that can be thought 
by any rational person to resemble in the least, either of 
the foregoing particulars : and these, on examination, will 
be found not to support the one, but to oppose some other 
item in this theory. They are the following : viz. Isa. xiv : 
12-15; Rev. xii : 7-9; 2 Pet. ii: 4; and Jude 6. The 
text in Isaiah so evidently relates to the king of Babylon, 
that no man in his senses will attempt to apply it to any 
other being or subject. The one in Revelation is so obvi- 
ously figurative, from the whole context, and by the uni- 
versal consent of all good critics, that I have no apprehen- 
sion you will risk your reputation in defending a different 
view of it. From the highly figurative manner in which 
the words devils angels, heaven, and earth are used in the 
Apocalypse, and from the connexion in which this text 
stands, it will appear obvious, I think, that the devil and 
his angels there spoken of, were the Jewish power aiid 
those who executed it in persecuting the Christians ; and 
that the " heaven" out of which they were cast, was the 
holy land, or Palestine, and " the earth" into which they 
were cast, was, the Gentile nations whither they were dis- 
^ persed abroad. If you think the text is to be understood 
literally, then be so good as to reconcile the fact here sla- 
ted, that the devil and his angels were cast out of heaven 
^' into the earth,''' with that part of your theory that main- 
tains they were cast out of heaven into hell. You will 
find it impossible to reconcile the text, if taken literally, 
with your theory. 

The text in Peter reads thus : " For if God spared not 
the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and 
delivered them into chains of darkness to be reserved unto 
judgment — ." Possibly you will say, this text unequivo- 
cally supports the doctrine of fallen angels. Grant that it 
does; what follows? Why, that these angels cannot be 
the devil and his host that are so much talked of by the 
Orthodox. For the devil and his host are supposed to 
have been at once consigned to the fierce torments of end- 
less damnation in hell ; but those that Peter mentions were 
said to be reserved unto judgment. Again, those that ; 
you believe in, are supposed to be roaming abroad through 
the whole earth deceiving and leading mankind astray ; 
but these are said to be " delivered into chains of dark- 

8 



86 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



ness"— " reserved — " so that they cannot now be roaming- 
abroad and deceiving men. I wish, dear Sir, you would 
take your Bible and examine this subject, text and context, 
with care, and you will discover that Peter does not ad- 
vance these words by way of assertion, nor for the purpose 
of informing his brethren any thing new on the subject ; 
but incidental!}^ introduces the idea, as though it were al- 
ready well understood by his brethren, for the purpose of 
drawing a moral reflection from the subject. "For if,'' 
says he, " God spared not the angels that sinned," &:c. — 
" the Lord knoweth" [here is the moral reflection he draws] 
" how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to reserve 
the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished."— 
Here then is the point towards which his previous obser- 
vations were directed — that God was able to deliver the 
godly out of temptation, and reserve the wicked unto the 
day of judgment to be punished. The apostle does not 
inform, who these angels were, what their crime consisted 
in, nor w^hen nor where it was committed. You are aw^are 
that the word angel does not necessarily designate a spirit^ 
but literally signifies a messenger, or one sent. Who or 
what these messengers or angels were, we are not informed, 
either by Peter or any other inspired writer. As it is ob- 
vious, from the apostle's language, that those to whom he 
wrote perfectly understood him, it must be supposed either 
that the account of these angels was contained in some 
apocryphal book well known to them, but not now in exis- 
tence, or that these angels were some messengers or per- 
sons w^ho lived in the days of the apostles, and were per- 
sonally known to them. Some have supposed that they 
were the spies formerly sent by Moses to survey the land 
of Canaan ; but there is nothing but conjecture in favor of 
the supposition. It is not an unreasonable supposition to 
suppose these angels or messengers had been among the 
first promulgators of the Gospel, and engaged in preaching 
the word unto their fellow-sinners; and had apostatized 
from the faith and profession of Christianity, in consequence 
of which [according to Jude] they " kept not their first es- 
tate, but left their own habitations," or stations in their 
icffice, and were " cast down" from their moral elevation 
in the Gospel kingdom, to the lowest depths of moral de- 
pravity — confined in chains of mental darkness — " shut up 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



87 



Hnto the faith ;" (Gal. iii : 23.) The Gospel was hid to 
them — its glorious light shown not unto them (2 Cor. 
iv : 3,4.) It being "impossible — to renew them again 
unto repentance, seeing they crucified unto themselves the 
Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame :" (Heb. 
vi : 4-6.) Having " sinned wilfully after they had receiv- 
ed the knowiedg-e of the truth," there remained for them 
" a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indig- 
nation which should devour the adversaries." (Heb. x: 
26, 27.) Thus they were cast down to hell ; (see Isa. 
xiv : 12-15; Ps. ix : 17, xviii : 5, cxvi : 3; Jonah ii : 
1-6 ; Matt, xi : 23 ;) and " reserved in" those " chains" of 
mental "darkness, unto the judgment of the great day," 
which great day of judgment was then fast approaching, 
when " wrath should come upon them to the uttermost" — 
when there was to be " great tribulation, such as was not 
since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever 
shall be" — when they, (i. e. these apostates,) with the unbe- 
lieving Jews, were to be " punished with everlastipg de- 
struction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory 
of his power," or in their dispersed and wretched condi- 
tion, away from the holy land and the beautiful temple 
where " the presence of the Lord and the glory of his 
power" had for so many ages dwelt. " For if the righte- 
ous" (that is, the disciples who continued " faithful to the 
end" in obedience to their Master) " scarcely be saved," 
(i. e. escape from Jerusalem with their lives,) " where shall 
the ungodly and the sinner appear?" i. e. where shall these 
apostate disciples, with their companions in guilt, the per- 
secuting Jews, appear, but in the endurance of all those 
dreadful calamities to be experienced by that wicked na- 
tion, when the vials of wrath which they had "treasured 
up against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous 
judgment of God," should be poured out upon them ? — 
These threatened judgments were actually executed upon 
that generation ; as our Lord said, Matt, xxiv : 34, after 
describing the signs by which the disciples would know 
and be able to avoid these " days of vengeance." " Verily 
I say unto you, this generation shall not pass till all these 
things be fulfilled." 

The text in Jude is but a repetition of the same ideas 
conveyed by Peter, with a trifling variation in the form of 



88 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIIS'. 



expression. And the view taken of the text in Peter seems 
to be further confirmed and illustrated by this text and its 
context in Jude. The apostle does not inform his brethren 
of any thing they did not alread}^- know ; but says, " I will 
therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once kneio 
this,^^ &c. The facts were familiar to them, and seem to 
have been under their own observation. " For there are 
certain men,^^ he says, [not fallen spi7'its,] " crept in una- 
wares, who were before of old, ordained to this condemna- 
tion : ungodly men, turning the grace of God into lascivi- 
ousness, and den^^ing the only Lord God, and our Cord 
Jesus Christ." He then proceeds to put them " in remem- 
brance" of these men, and the judgments that awaited them, 
and as a sample of these judgments, cites them to the case 
of the ancient Jews who trusted not in God, after they had 
been delivered from Egypt: the crimes of these ungodly 
men in his day in " turning the grace of God into lascivi- 
ousness" were similar to those of the ancients, and so would 
be their punishment. " And even the angels" (or some of 
the messengers for preaching the Gospel) " which kept not 
their first estate, but left their own habitations (or offices) 
he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto 
the judgment of the great day." He hath given them over 
to the perpetual bondage of their own blindness of mind 
and hardness of heart, to be reserved under that darkness 
till their ''judgment, which now of a long time lingereth 
not, and their damnation which slumbereth not," come upon 
them. The apostle then introduces the case of Sodom and 
Gomorrah, as a case in point further to illustrate the dread- 
ful overthrow which awaited these apostates and filthy 
dreamers, who " defile the flesh, despise dominion, and 
speak evil of dignities." Thus, as those cities suffered 
" the vengeance of eternal fire," which fire continued to 
burn under and around the dead sea, where those cities 
stood, for many ages after their overthrow, as a memento 
of divine justice, so the vengeance to be taken on that 
wicked generation should continue to be manifest for many 
generations after it, as we see it is even at this day. 

I shall defer the further consideration of this subject till 
my next. In the mean time, believe me, Eev. Sir, 
Yours with sincere respect. 



LETTER XIV. 



The same subject continued. 

Rev. and Dear Sir — Having shown in my last that the 
principal texts of Scripture relied on for proof of the doc- 
trine of fallen angels, give no countenance to that strange 
notion, I shall now proceed further to notice the doctrine, 
and particularly to consider the popular ideas of a personal 
devil, and of his having once been an angel in heaven. 

And here let me ask, if the popular doctrine be true, is 
it not strange that none of the sacred writers have asserted 
it, either directly or indirectly ? How is it to be accounted 
for, if the devil be a fallen angel, that no account is given 
of him in the books of Moses, nor no mention made of any 
such being either by the prophets or by any of the Old 
Testament patriarchs, and that none of those distinguished 
servants of the Most High, had any knowledge of such a 
being ? We should naturally suppose, if an exalted angel 
in heaven had rebelled, seduced others to rebel, and been 
driven out of heaven, Moses would have related the fact, 
and especially if it took place about the time of the crea- 
tion of this world, and mankind were in danger of being 
ensnared by his subtle wiles. But Moses is perfectly silent 
about any such event. Nor does he or any other Old Tes- 
tament writer mention the creation of the devil, or inform 
mankind that any such being existed, or that they were in 
any danger from his temptations ; so that if such a being, 
so dangerous to the peace, safety and happiness of man- 
kind, really exist, God suffered the whole human race to 
remain totally ignorant of the fact, at least four thousand 
years. How will you account for these things ? How will 
you exonerate the Deity from the charge of being the ene- 
my of his children, by suffering them so long to remain 
ignorant of their worst enemy and greatest danger ? 

Perhaps you will say, we have accounts of the devil in 
the Old Testament, sufficiently clear and definite for the 
instruction and admonition of all who read the Bible, par- 
ticularly in the account of the temptation and sin of our 

8# 



90 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



first parents. But, Sir, what says the account of the temp- 
tation and sin of our first parents, as given in the book of 
Genesis, concerning a personal devil? Nothing. What 
says that account about a fallen angel? Nothing. Nei- 
ther the one nor the other of these names is mentioned. 
We are informed there, that " Adam gave names to all 
cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the 
field/^ — " Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast 
of the field which the Lord God had made. And he (that 
is, the serpent) said unto the woman," &c. Would this 
account suggest to the common reader the idea of any 
ether being than one of the beasts of the field (the most 
subtle, to be sure) which the Lord God had made, and to 
which Adam gave the name of serpent 1 Certainly no 
other being is mentioned or alluded to in the account given 
by Moses : and when Adam is accused of eating the for- 
bidden fruit, he lays the blame on the woman, and the wo- 
raan on the serpent^ not on a wicked spirit called the devil, 
nor ?i fallen angel. And God pronounces the punishment 
on the serpent, not on a fallen angel. The sentence is, 

upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all 
the days of thy life" — a curious sentence truly, to be pro- 
nounced on ?i fallen angel I 

Should you be disposed to ask whether I understand 
this account literally, and suppose a real serpent was in- 
tended, I answer, I should as soon believe a real serpent, 
literally a snake, was intended, as, that a spirit, once a 
hcjly angel in heaven was meant. But I understand by the 
rerpent^ that lust or desire is personified. It was the desire^ 
no doubt, that tempted Eve to eat the fruit; and this de- 
tire v/as probably increased by the prohibition. The mere 
desire for the fruit was not sinful, but the yielding to that 
desire contrary to the commandment, was sin. Paul says, 

I had not known sin but by the law ; for I had not known 
1 jst except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." Rom. 
vii : 7. James says, " lust, when it hath conceived, bring- 
eth forth sin." The serpent, from its subtlety, was select- 
ed by Moses as a fit emblem by which to represent the 
ensnaring nature of lust and the " deceitfulness of sin." 
And certainly it was as suitable a figure for this purpose, 
as the lion is to represent ferocity, the lamb meekness, and 
the dove harmlessness. The sentence pronounced on the 



LETTERS TO REV, S. C. AlKIN. 



91 



serpent denotes the mean, low, grovelling nature, propen- 
sity and destination of lust. 

Having seen that the account of our first parents' sin in 
Eden, contains nothing in relation to a personal devil, or a 
fallen angel, let us now see if the idea of such a being is 
any where suggested in the Old Testament. And here I 
remark that the word devil is not once found in all the 
books of the Old Testament. The word devils (in the 
plural number only) occurs four times ; and by quoting the 
texts we shall be able to ascertain what kind of devils they 
were, or whether they resembled the Orthodox devil of 
this age. " And they shall no more offer their sacrifices 
unto devils after whom they have gone a whoring.'' Lev. 
xvii : 7. " They sacrificed unto devils^ not to God ; to 
gods w^hom they knew not, to neiv gods that came newly up, 
[devils appear to have been something new at that age, so 
long after the sin and fall of man,] whom your fathers 
feared not." Deut. xxxii : 17. And he [Jeroboam] or- 
dained him priests for the high places, and for the devils, 
and for the calves which he had made^ 2 Chron. xi : 15. 
[His devils were probably manufactured with as much 
facility, and of similar materials, as the mechanic manu- 
factures his wares.] " Yea, they sacrificed their sons and 
their daughters unto devils.^^ Ps. cvi : 37. 

Should you now resort to the word satan, a convertible 
mode of expression for devil, and contend that, because it 
is s'jaid, " when the sons of God came to present themselves 
before the Lord, satan came also among them ;" therefore 
the popular doctrine of a personal devil is supported by 
the Old Testament ; I would remind you that so singular 
a doctrine as this needs some further support than a few 
isolated expressions taken from a book of allegories. And 
further, if we are warranted in believing in a distinct, per- 
sonal evil spirit, because we read of satan here, then we 
must allow that Christ chose two such evil beings for his 
apostles : for one of them he called a devil, and another 
satan. 

If, however, you are disposed to consider the book of 
Job as a record of historical facts, instead of an allegory, 
I think you will be led to believe, after a careful examina- 
tion of the book, that the idea of satan's being engaged in, 
and the author of, Job's afflictions, or the afflictions of any 



92 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



of the human family, was introduced rather to refute it and 
show the inhabitants of that age its falsity, than to esta- 
blish it. The reasons for this conclusion are obvious^ — 
The scenes of the book of Job are laid in the land of Uz, 
where Paganism prevailed, and particularly the philo- 
sophy of the Persian Magi. The Magian system of phi- 
losophy maintained that there were two beings in existence, 
the one good, and the other bad ; the one the author of 
light and of all good; the other the author of darkness and of 
all evil ; the good being they called Ormudz^ (in the Greek 
Oromasdes,) the evil being Ahraman^ (in Greek Arimam- 
ICS.) Ormudz was supposed to be the author of all prosperity 
and happiness, and Ahraman of all misfortunes, calamity 
and misery. This theory is introduced in the commence- 
ment of the book of Job — the Ahraman of the Magi is 
here called satan, or adversary, and supposed to be the au- 
thor of all Job's calamities and sufferings. But is this 
supposition allowed to stand uncontroverted and unrefuted ? 
Certainly not : for so far from allowing that Ahraman or 
satan was the author of his sufferings. Job uniformly as- 
cribes them to Jehovah, to the good God, and not to an evil 
one. He says, " the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken 
away, (not satan hath taken away,) blessed be the name 
of the Lord." When his wife desired him to curse God 
and die. Job replies, " Thou speakest as one of the foolish 
(i. e. the Heathen or Persian) women speaketh. What! 
shall w^e receive good at the hand of God, and shall we 
not receive evil V Thus, throughout the whole book, not 
only Job, but his friends and all the characters or person- 
ages introduced, ascribe the calamities he suffered in the 
loss of his possessions, and the sore affliction from his biles, 
not to the Persian evil god, nor the modern Christian's 
devil or satan, but to God alone. To him alone, all his 
prosperity and all his adversity is ascribed. See Job i: 
21, iv : 9, V : 17, 18, vi: 4, 5, vii : 20, 21, viii : 3, 4, ix : 
16-18, X : 2, xvi : 11-15, 19, 21, and xlii : 10-12. Thus 
the whole book goes to refute the notion that an evil being 
had any thing to do with the afflictions of Job. And cer- 
tainly nothing is said here about any fallen angel. 

Again : If satan be the name of an evil being, a fallen 
angel, is it not strange that in the first instance where it is 
used in the Bible, it is used in the feminine gender, (as a 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



93 



Hebrew noun,) and applied to a well ? See Genesis xxvi : 
21. "And they digged aootlier well, and strove about 
that : and he called the name of it Sitnah.'" The signi- 
fication as given in the margin, is hatred. The next pas- 
sage where it occurs, is in Numbers xxii : 22, 23. " And 
God's anger was kindled, because he (Balaam) went : and 
the angel of the Lord stood in the way for an adversary 
(satan) against him. Behold I went out to withstand thee, ) 
because thy way is perverse before me." In the above 
two verses the word satan occurs twice in the original : 
in the first it is rendered adversary, and in the second " to 
vnthstand thee.'''' And what is worthy of your particular 
notice, it is not applied to an evil fallen spirit, but to the 
good angel of the Lord. By examining 1 Sam. xxix : 4 ; 
2 Sam. xix: 22, and 1 Kings v: 4, xi: 14, 23, 25, you 
will find the word rendered adversary^ is in the original, 
satan ; and is applied to David, to the sons of Zeruiah, to 
Hadad, to Rezon, and others. In Ezra iv : 6, the word 
satan is rendered accusation. In Ps. xxxviii : 20, Ixxi : 13, 
and cix : 4, the word satan occurs in the plural number, 
and is in each place rendered adversai^ies. 

But I need not multiply quotations and references to 
places where the w^ord satan occurs in the original of the 
Old Testament. Your own good sense and acquaintance 
with the Scriptures, must satisfy you that the word satan 
signifies simply an adversary^ and is generally applied to 
men who sustain the character of adversaries. And had 
king James' translators rendered it thus in all places, or 
adobted any uniform word by which to translate it, there 
could have been no difficulty in every English reader's 
understanding it. But by rendering it by different words 
in English, sometimes adversary^ sometimes to ivithstand^ 
sometimes accusation, and sometimes using the word satan^ 
?^7^^r«?z5Za^e^,they have introduced confusion into the mind 
of the common reader, and by the magic of clerical art, a 
super-human, but fallen and wicked spirit, has been conju- 
red up, and favored with a conspicuous place in the creeds 
of men, when in fact no such being was known or even 
thought of by the writers of the inspired volume. 

Having seen that the Old Testament furnishes no evi- 
dence of a personal devil, under any name, or of a fallen an- 
gel, who was once in heaven, but now an arch-fiend, tempt- 



94 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



iug, deceiving, and leading mankind astray, I will now call 
your attention to the New Testament, and see whether 
that affords any evidence of such a theory. 

And here it is proper to remark, that there are various 
words in the original Greek which are rendered devil in 
Qm version. And these Avords are as different in their 
original signification as are the words enemy and lunatic. 
Not only so, but the same word is frequently rendered by 
different English words in our common version. 

The word diabolos, most commonly rendered devil, and 
more properly so than any other word in the Greek, is 
compounded of dia, through, and ballo, to dart, throw, strilce, 
or stab ; and signifies slanderer, accuser, or enemy — one 
who stabs with an accusation. This word is applied to 
women, in the plural number, 1 Tim. iii : 11. "Even so 
must their wives (i. e. the deacons' wives) be grave, not 
slanderers^ (diabolous,ov devils,) sober, faithful in all things.'* 
Here the apostle evidently supposed it possible for the 
deacons' wives to become devils, or he would not have ad- 
monished them against it. Is it possible he could have 
feared they would become fall e7i angels ? 

The Greek word daimon and daimonion, are nearly or 
quite synonymous, and are generally in the New Testa- 
ment used to denote lunatics or insane persons, or the mad- 
ness or mental disorders with which they were afflicted. 
One or the other of these w^ords (and not diabolos) is used 
in each of the following passages: Matt, viii: 28-31, ix: 
32, xi : 18, XV : 22, xvii : 18 ; Mark v : 15, 16, 18, vii : 
26-30 ; Luke iv : 33, 35, viii : 29, ix : 42, xi : 14 ; John 
vii : 20, viii : 48-52, x : 20, 21. In most of these passa- 
ges it must appear perfectly obvious, that being possessed 
of devils {daimon, or daimonion) can mean nothing more 
nor less than being afflicted with some mental or bodily 



disease. In some of them it is particularly so defined. 
Matt, xvii : 15, the subject is expressly called " lunatic,'** 
In Luke xi : 14, the subject was evidently dumb ; and the 
dumbness was the only devil or evil of which he was pos- 



The Jews, at the time of our Saviour's advent, and for 
several generations before, appear to have believed in the 
existence of evil spirits, or demons, and that to .these de- 
mons nearly all the mental and corporeal diseases of men 



sessed. 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



95 



were to be ascribed. Our Saviour, however, never taught 
nor countenanced this opinion. Neither did the Jews de- 
rive it from any of their sacred writings ; (for it was not 
taught in them ;) but from the Heathen nations with whom 
they associated. The Heathens had deified the departed 
spirits of their heroes and dead men, and divided them 
into good and evil, supposing they were allowed to visit 
men in this world, and bless or torment them, according to 
their pleasure, or the permission of the good and evil 
powers under which they were respectively commissioned 
to act. The ignorant multitude would as readily be indu- 
ced to believe this theory, as our superstitious forefathers 
were to believe in witchcraft, or the absolute existence of 
witches and wizzards. And not only so, but the very sub- 
jects themselves, when visited with any malady, would 
immediately ascribe it to some evil demon. The Heathen 
Mythology exhibits a vast multitude and variety of gods 
and demons, good and bad. The Greeks alone had a cata- 
logue, it is said, of thirty thousand. The Jews, though 
differing in some of their notions of the demons, yet fell 
in with their general system in regard to evil angels or 
demons. Though the Jews believed in the existence and 
influence of these demons or evil spirits, they do not ap- 
pear to have deified them quite as much as the Heathens 
did, from whom they derived their theory. Hence, our 
translators, being aware of this fact, have in one instance 
so far departed from their general rule as to accommodate 
our version to the Heathen notion of demons, where the 
Heathens were represented as the speakers. Acts xvii : 18. 
When certain philosophers of the Epicureans and of the 
Stoics encountered Paul, at Athens, " some said. What 
will this babbler say? other some. He seemeth to be a set- 
ter forth of strange gods, {daimonion,) because he preached 
unto them Jesus and the resurrection." Here our trans- 
lators have metamorphosed their devils^ or what they usu- 
ally translate devils, into gods. 

There is no difficulty in understanding all those passa- 
ges where daimon and daimonion occur, when the origin 
of them is consulted, and the circumstance taken into con- 
sideration, that in Scripture phraseology there are frequent 
oecurrences of metonymy and prosopopoeia, by which de- 
moniacs or persons possessed, are put for the demons ol' 



96 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



raaladies by which they are possessed, and, vice versa^ the 
demons or evils put for the persons afflicted with them. 
See Matt, viii : 31, 32 ; Mark v : 10, 12. In the last ver- 
ses mentioned we find the maii possessed, beseeching Jesus 
in one verse, and the devils beseeching him in the other ; 
by which the biblical critic will at once perceive that the 
man possessed besought Jesus that the madness with which 
he was afflicted might enter into and take possession of the 
herd of swine. Mr. Harwood's liberal translation of the 
12th verse, reads thus : " The madman, uttering such wild 
extravagant things as persons disordered in their intellects 
do, desired that the demons which were in him might enter 
into the swine." 

A view of some of the principal texts of Scripture where 
diaholos occurs in the original, will constitute the theme of 
my next, with some concluding remarks on the subject in 
general. Eespectfully Yours. 



LETTER XV. 

The same subject continued. 

Rev. Sir — I shall now proceed, as proposed in my last, 
to consider some of the principal passages of Scripture 
where the word diaholos occurs, and to make some further 
gene/a^ , ..iiarkb on the idea of fallen angels and a per- 
sonal devil. 

The first passage (and a principal one relied on in sup- 
port of your theory) I shall nr^?ce, is Matt, iv : 1-12 ; and 
its parallels, Mark i : 12, ' .^nd Luke iv : 1-14, where 
we are furnished with an accv/.nt of our Saviour's temp- 
tation. It is proper to remark that the words diaholos, or 
devil, and satan, are here used synonymously, or to signify 
the same thing. That a personal devil, or evil being was 
here intended or represented, will, I conceive, be contend- 
ed for on no other ground than that this account is to be 
understood literally. For if the literality of the account 
be once given np, I cannot conceive how it will be possible 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



97 



for you to raise an argument in favor of the personality of 
the devil, satan, or tempter, here described. And in my 
opinion the literal interpretation of it is not only attended 
with difficulties hard to surmount, but with the most mon- 
strous absurdities, such as are even shocking to common 
sense. 

Taken literally, the account supposes the devil to be the 
greatest fool in existence — ^^to appear in propria persona in 
presence of that illustrious personage whom he knew to 
to be the Son of God, and offer temptations to him which 
could proceed only from an evil being ! With what pros- 
pect of success could he thus openly and undisguisedly 
assail the Son of God ? The feeblest virtue would resist 
such temptations at once, and surely come off victorious, 
knowing that the tempter was the devil himself. 

The learned Mr. Farmer, whose remarks will have some 
weight with you, when speaking relative to a literal inter- 
pretation of the passage, says, '^In the first temptation in 
which Jesus is solicited to turn stones into bread," nothing 
is promised on the part of satan to gain his consent; the 
request of an inplacable enemy, when no advantage attends 
it, being in itself a reason for rejecting it. But satan defeats 
his own temptation by asking an useless favor. 

" While the foe betrays great folly in the first tempta- 
tion, he supposes Christ to be actuated by still greater in 
the second. The people on seeing Jesus throwing him- 
self from the top of the temple, might conclude that he 
was the Son of God. But he knew that the tempter had 
it in his power to lead them, to draw the same conclusion 
of himself. Satan also would throw himself down unhurt ; 
and his miraculous preservation would prove him, as well 
as Jesus, to be the Son of God. Nay, he might claim the 
superiority ; for it was a greater exertion of power to con- 
vey him from the wilderness to the top of the temple, than 
in sustaining his fall to the court below. What induce- 
ment, then, could Christ have for a compliance with the 
proposal suggested ] Would he be disposed to gratify satan 
by doing an act at his mere suggestion ] Was he to ac- 
quire any glory or advantage to himself] No ; on the con- 
trary, he would have incurred the infamy of having enter- 
ed the" lists with the devil without having acquired any 
superiority over him. 



98 



LETTERS TO REV. C. AIKIN. 



" With regard to the third temptation, the Son of God 
knew that the father of lies had not the empire of the world 
at his disposal, and that he therefore promised what he had 
not power to perform. Such a promise was rather an in- 
sult than a temptation, and was calculated only to provoke 
scorn or resentment. Could the devil then hope by such 
contemptuous treatment, to engage the Son of God to lis- 
ten to his accursed councils ; and seduce him to an act of 
the highest dishonor to his heavenly Father, that of paying 
divine homage to this infernal spirit ? This interpretation 
represents the old serpent as acting quite out of character, 
and supposes him to be as void of policy as he is of good- 
ness ; inasmuch, as he used the least art in proposing 
temptations, where the greatest would have been insuffi- 
cient to insure success. 

" It detracts from the dignity and sanctity of the Re- 
deemer, to be seen in conference with, and under the power 
of, an unclean spirit, who transports at his pleasure his 
Sovereign and his Judge, from place to place ; raises him 
to the most conspicuous stations to expose him to public 
derision ; and wantonly and arrogantly propounds to him 
one foolish enterprise after another." 

The common opinion is objectionable, 1. Because, not- 
withstanding it supposes the devil to be the most subtle 
and crafty of all beings, yet in the temptation of Jesus, it 
ascribes to him the greatest imaginable folly. 2. Because 
it ascribes to him the performance of stupendous miracles ; 
such as assuming a corporeal or invisible form at his op- 
tion, speaking with human voice and organs, transporting 
our Saviour bodily to the top of the lofty Jewish temple, 
&c. 3. Because it ascribes to him not only foolish and 
absurd acts, but absolute impossibilities. Such for exam- 
ple as his showing Christ all the kingdoms of the loorld 
from an exceeding high mountain ; for the earth being glo- 
bular, there is not only no mountain sufficiently lofty to 
command a view of all its kingdoms, but even the sun itself 
can be seen by, and shine on, only one hemisphere at a time. 
How thenpould the devil, at one view, and in one moment of 
time, show Christ not only all the kingdoms of the earth, but 
likewise every thing that constituted their glory and gran- 
deur ? " This," Mr. Farmer justly remarks, " does not seem 
so properly a miracle, as an absurdity and contradiction." 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



99 



You will now probably ask, if I reject a literal interpreta- 
tion of this account, how shall it be understood ? Who or 
what was the tempter, and what was the temptation ? I ap- 
prehend we shall find these questions abundantly answered 
by a careful attention to the Scriptures. We are informed, 
Heb. iv : 15, that Jesus " was tempted in all points — like 
as we are^ yet without sin." How are we tempted ? James 
says, i : 14, " Every man is tempted when he is drawn 
away of his own lust, and enticed." If then, Jesus ''was 
tempted in all points like as we are," and if " every man 
is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust and 
* enticed," what reason have we to believe he was tempted 
in so very different a manner from any of the rest of the 
human family, as this account, taken literally, would sup- • 
pose. What reason have we to believe a personal devil, 
or fallen angel, had any thing to do with it ? Have any 
of us ever seen, or held personal conferences with, or had 
direct and open temptations presented to us by, such a 
being ? No one in his senses will pretend it. The temp- 
tation of Christ, then, was like the temptation of any and 
every other man, except so far as his circumstances and 
situation differed from those of other men, which circum- 
stances possibly might have made his temptation more 
trying than is generally experienced. He had just been 
baptized, and received the special attestations of the divine 
favor in the descent of the holy spirit upon him, designa- 
ting him as the promised Messiah ; immediately after which 
he was led up by the spirit of God (not by a fallen angel) 
into the v/ilderness, to pass trial, as it were, preparatory to 
entering on the great work before him. And if he was 
not superior to, and able to overcome, the evil propensities 
of human nature, " the lust of the flesh, the lust of the 
eyes and the pride of life," he was unfit for the labor of 
reforming the world. 

I will now attend to the account of the temptations. — 
" And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he 
was afterward an hungered." Matt, iv : 2. W^earenotto 
suppose that during these forty days our Lord totally ab- 
stained from the use of all food. Fasting, in Scripture 
language^ frequently signifies the taking of a less quantity, 
or coarser kind of food than usual, or going without any 
regular meals. See Acts xxvii : 33, and other passages, 



100 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



particularly the book of Daniel. No miracle is here sup- 
posed to have been wrought ; though a miracle would have 
been necessary to sustain life forty days without any food. 
And if a miracle were wrought to sustain life without food, 
why not proper that the miraculous power be employed to 
turn stones into bread for the same purpose, i. e. to keep 
him alive by some extraordinary means 1 It was natural, 
after fasting forty days, that his appetite should become 
clamorous, and his lust, or great desire for food, should 
suggest to him the idea of working a miracle to supply his 
wants. But this evil temptation he resisted ; and thus ex- 
postulates with his appetite : It is written, Man shall not 
live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out 
* of the mouth of God That is, the power of working , 
miracles was not given me for this purpose, to minister to 
my own appetites, but for a very different object — I am 
sent to minister to others and to save the w^orld — " It is 
my meat and drink to do the will of him that sent me," 
and he who has sent me for this purpose, will sustain me, 
and provide, in due time, for all my wants. Here is no 
necessity of supposing a fallen angel or personal evil spirit : 
bodily appetite was the tempter ; and by resisting it, our 
Saviour proved that he came to destroy the works of the 
devil, or that lust vrhich would tempt to the abuse or per- 
version of powers and privileges. 

In the second temptation, he is raised to a pinnacle of the 
temple and urged to cast himself down, &c. This ac- 
count represents Jesus as raised in his imagination to the 
mxost elevated -station in the Jewish temple and kingdom, 
and possessed of the means (by working a miracle before 
the assembled nation, and throwing himself down, or cast- 
ing himself among them as their king from heaven) of 
raising himself to the throne, and being proclaimed Mes- 
siah, King of the Jews, without submitting to the humilia- 
tion, trials and sufferings that he knew he must otherwise 
endure. He sav/ on the one hand, poverty, reproach, con-v 
tempt, sufferings and death ; and on the other, riches, ho- 
nor, worldly greatness and grandeur ; and the same moti^'^ 
that prompted the prayer in reference to the former, " if it 
be possible let this cup pass from me," also prompted the 
desire of attaining the latter. But does he yield to this 
temptation I does he consult his own will alone, or s^ek 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



101 



only his own worldly emolument and ease 1 No ; he firmly 
resists those evil suggestions of his own desires ; and says, 
" Not my will, but thine, O God, be done" — " It is writ- 
ten. Thou shaltnot tempt the Lord thy God" — " My king- 
dom is not of this world ;" — he spurns the crown from him 
with disdain, ^or this was not the object of his mission — 
this was not the purpose for which the power of working 
mirs^les was given to him. Here, again, as in the first 
temptation, there is no need of supposing a personal devil 
concerned in the proposing of the miracle. His own de- 
sires were sufficient. 

In the third temptation, Christ was taken to the top of 
an exceeding high mountain, and all the kingdoms of the 
world and their glory were presented to his view, and he 
was promised them all if he would fall down and worship 
his tempter. But I ask, Sir, was a wicked and fallen an- 
gel in possession of all these 1 or could Jesus be made to 
believe he had it in his power to bestow them on him? 
The supposition is too full of absurdity to be credited for 
a moment. The mountain on which ii^ was elevated was 
doubtless that of human greatness — the tempter, ambition. 
His ambition, or the lust of power so natural to man, sug- 
gested to him the means of acquiring all these kingdoms, 
if he would devote himself obsequiousljr to its dictates. 
The Roman power, at that time, extended over all the 
known world, and gave the kingdoms of the world to whom-- 
soever it listed. Ambition prompted the desire to possess 
this power, by placing himself at its head. But does he 
yield to the temptation, and use his miraculous power to 
acquire this temporal but universal empire ? No : this 
was not the object for which the power of working mira- 
cles was given him. Though born to be a king over all the 
earth ; and though all the kingdoms of the world were final- 
ly to become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ, 
and his dominion was to be " from sea to sea, and from the 
rivers to the ends of the earth ;" yet his sceptre was to be 
" the sceptre of righteousness," and through sufferings was 
he to be made perfect. " For the hope of the glory set be- 
fore him," he was to " endure the cross, despising the 
shame." " Though he were a Son, he learned obedience 
by the things which he suffered." He worshipped none 
of the gods of this world ; neither pride, nor avarice, nor am- 

9# 



102 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



bition ; but resisted all their temptations, saying, " Get thee 
behind me satan, (or adversary,) for it is written. Thou shalt 
worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. ^' 

Thus, Sir, the whole account of our Saviour's tempta- 
tion by the devil,or satan, is explained consistently and satis- 
factorily, without either doing violence to the Scriptures 
on the one hand, or outraging reason and common sense 
on the other. Should you be disposed to object against 
the explanation I have given, by saying it detracts from 
the honor, dignity, and excellency of our Lord, to suppose 
him liable to be tempted or influenced by any of the hu- 
man and evil propensities or passions named; I reply: 
Jesus was subject to like passions and wants with other 
men — he was hungry, and thirsty, and weary, offended 
and pleased, he rejoiced and wept — ^he was tempted "in 
all points like as we are, yet without sin. For in that he 
himself hath suffered, being tempted, he is able to succour 
them that are tempted." Sin does not consist in having 
passions or infirmities, nor in being tempted by them, but 
in yielding to them contrary to the law of God or known 
duty. Hence, the having of them is no disparagement to 
the character of Jesus, but the overcoming of them is 
greatly to his honor ; even more so than if, being free from 
them, he had merely refused to yield to the foolish pro- 
jects of an open and known foe, where no possible advan- 
tage could accrue from yielding to them. 

The word diaholos is frequently used to represent or 
personify an evil principle, particularly hatred or enmity. 
It is also applied to individuals and bodies of men who 
are actuated by hatred or enmity. John vi : 70. " Have 
not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Dr. 
Campbell renders the term diaholos here spy, Newcomb and 
Wakefield render it accuser^ and the Improved Version, 
false accuser. John xiii : 2. "And supper being ended, 
the devil having now put it into the heart of Judas Isca- 
riot, Simon's son, to betray him," &c. In one of these 
texts Judas is called a devil ; and in the other the devil is 
said to have put the evil intention into his heart. Now 
what is the inference to be drawn from this circumstance, 
unless it be this, that the Jews^ or enemies of Christ had 
put it into the heart of Judas to betray him, and he had 
actically become one of his enemies ? 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



103 



1 Peter v : 8. " Be sober, be vigilant, because your ad- 
versaryi the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking 
whom he may devour," &c. Here the adversary, so em- 
phatically called the devil, is compared to a roaring lion, 
that walketh about seeking whom he may devour. Now 
that this adversary was nothing more nor less than human 
beings, 1 think will appear evident by a little reflection and 
examination. Human beings are frequently compared to 
lions, devouring lions, and roaring lions ; and not only so, 
tut bodies of people are thus spoken of in the singular 
number. See Num. xxiii : 24, xxiv: 8, 9; Jer. ii : 30, 
iv : 7, and 1 : 17 ; Ps. xvii : 12, xxii : 13, 21 ; Prov. xix: 
12, XX : 2 ; Isa. v : 29 ; Ezek. xix : 1-6, xxii : 25 ; 2 Tim. 
iv : 17. It is a well known fact, the Jews in general, and 
particularly those in authority, the high priest, elders, 
Scribes and Pharisees, were the common enemy of the 
Gospel of Christ and of his apostles ; and spoken of col- 
lectively, are called " the devil," " the adversary," " satan," 
&c. See 1 Thes. ii : 14-18, where the connexion plainly 
shows that the " satan" spoken of was the Jews. The 
same may also be said of Eph. iv : 11, 12, &c. See Acts 
xvii : 5-13 ; 2 Tim. iv : 16, 17; 1 and 2 Thes. ; 1 and 2 
Peter ; and indeed the whole historical part of the New 
Testament goes to show that the unbelieving Jews were 
collectively the common adversary, enemy, false accuser, 
and persecutor of the Christians, and with propriety called 
the devil and satan. It was this satan that had desired to 
have Peter that he might sift him as wheat ; and so tho- 
roughly did the Jews sift Peter at the trial and condemna- 
tion of Jesus, that they made him thrice deny his master. 

John viii : 44. " Ye are of your father, the devil, and 
the lusts of your father ye will do," &:c. (See a parallel, 
Acts xiii : 10.) What devil was their father? Was it a 
fallen angel? and were they the lusts of a fallen angel 
that they did ? To show that we are under no necessity 
of applying this text to a fallen angel, personal devil, or 
real being, I will refer you to Professor Stuart's letters to 
Dr. Miller, (whose orthodoxy you will not question,) in 
which he says, " the word Son was a favorite one among 
the Hebrews ; and was employed by them to designate a 
great variety of relations. The son of any tkmg, accord- 
ing to oriental idiom, may be either tvhat is closely con- 



134 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



nected with it, dependent on it, like it, the consequence of 
it, worthy of it,^^ &c. The Professor then collates a great 
variety of passages from the Scriptures in which the word 
so?i is so used, such as so?i of eight days, son of a year, son 
of my sorrow, son of my right hand., son of old age, so7i of 
valor, son of Belial, son of wickedness, son of 'perdition, son 
of thunder, son of consolation, son of peace, &c. &c. Af- 
ter which he adds: — "Every kind of relation or resera- 
blance, whether real or imaginary, every kind of connexion, 
is characterized by calling it the son of that thing to which 
it stands thus related, or with which it is connected." Mr. 
Balfour, speaking on this text, very justly remarks, "It is 
a plain case then, that if the Jews were of their father the 
devil, or sons of the devil, and if the term devil means a 
slanderer, our Lord only told them that they were ' slan- 
derous persons.' Were they not closely connected with 
slander, dependent on it, like it, and worthy of it ? Mr. 
Stuart, by the above remarks, forever settles the question, 
that, neither here nor any where else, son of the devil 
refers to a fallen angel." 

The remarks already made upon those passages of 
Scripture which have been noticed, v/ill, as to their spirit 
and general bearing, be equally applicable to all other pas- 
sages where the word diabolos (devil) occurs in the original, 
and also to those where the word satan occurs. Indeed, 
they are generally considered the strongest holds in favor 
of the popular doctrine of a personal devil. I know of no 
others that have one-half the appearance of supporting 
that theory that these have which I have noticed. And 
as it has been clearly shown that these, when critically 
and fairly examined and explained, give no countenance 
whatever to so marvellous a doctrine, the theory, long as 
it has been preached by the Orthodox clergy, and firmly 
as it has been believed by their credulous hearers, must 
fall ; and like Babylon, " be found no more at all, for ever." 
It must be given up as a Heathen dogma unsupported by 
Scripture, and revolting to reason. A few remarks will 
conclude what I have to say upon this subject. 

1. The common doctrine of a personal devil detracts 
greatly from our ideas of the supremacy and goodness of 
God. For why should the Deity suffer sin in heaven, and 
allow an angel to rebel and be cast out of his kingdom, if 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN- 



105 



he were supreme in power and benevolence? And why, 
particularly would I ask, should he allow such a being to 
come to this fair world, mar the beauty of creation, -deceive^ 
lead astray, and ruin his best work ? Why subject his 
creature man to the malignant assaults and cruel caprice 
of so vile a demon ? 

2. This doctrine is inconsistent with itself. It supposes 
the devil to be confined in hell, and yet at large in the 
earth ; that he is not the Supreme Being, and yet is omni- 
present, in all parts of creation at one and the same time ; 
that he is constantly trying to drag people to hell, and yet 
is often the means, by frightening them, of driving them 
into the church and thence getting them to heaven ; that 
God can govern and rule him as he please, and yei he often 
thwarts the plans and defeats the purposes of Omnipotence, 
particularly in reviv^als of religion, when, notwithstanding 
God is trying to convert and save souls, the devil throws so 
many temptations and obstacles in the way, that thousands 
finally go down to hell whom God wished to take to heaven. 

3. This doctrine serves, if not entirely to excuse, at 
least greatly to palliate the crimes which men commit. — 
For it is a convenient and plausible plea for men to adopt, 
when overtaken in overt acts of wickedness : — " The devil 
tempted and deceived me into the fault" — Such an one, 
perhaps the murderer, " being instigated by the devil, did 
way-lay, assault and murder," &:c., thus throwing all the 
blame, from the real and actual villain, upon the back of 
the poor devil, who had no more to do with the crime than 
the inhabitants of the moon. 

4. The doctrine generates absurd, foolish, superstitious 
and pernicious fears in the minds of the weak and timid. 
How often are these people led to despair and unnatural 
fear, by believing themselves possessed of the devil, or 
given over to the buffetings and cruel caprices of this ma- 
lignant monster, for time and eternity ! 

5. Though it may be the means of frightening some 
timid and weak minds into obsequiousness to the dictates 
of the clergy, it can never be of any real advantage or 
benefit to those who believe it. The doctrine is not only 
useless, but its tendency is pernicious. 

6. There is no necessity for supposing the existence of 
such a being as the devil, either for a consistent explanation 



106 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



of the Scriptures, or for any other valuable purpose what- 
ever. All the evil existing in the world may be rationally 
and scripturally accounted for without this supposition. 
"Every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his 
own lust and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it 
bringeth forth sin ; and sin when it is finished, bringeth 
forth death." Christ came to "destroy the works of the 
devil i. e. to " take away the sin of the world." He is 
to " destroy death and him that hath the povi^er of death, 
that is, the devil," or that sin (the offspring of lust) which 
"when it is finished," or consummated, "bringeth forth 
death." John i : 29 ; Heb. ii : 14 ; James i : 14, 15; 1 John 
iii : 8. Yours, &:c. 



LETTER XVI. 

On the doctrine of the Ti'inity, 

Dear Sir — After so long a lapse of time, as has passed 
since I last wrote you, I again resume my pen to renew- 
edly call your attention to the discussion of the doctrinal 
subjects already commenced. I trust your goodness will 
pardon the delay, when I assure you, that, from the mul- 
tiplicity of my avocations, I have not found leisure to re- 
sume this labor till the present moment. The appropriation 
of my time to particular duties is regulated by the follow- 
ing rules, — I first consider and do what must be done ; 2. 
what ought to be done ; and 3, what may be done. As 
the writing of these letters was viewed among the second 
class of duties, and I have had a constant supply of the 
first on hand, therefore this delay. Not but that the sub- 
ject W^these letters is of sufficient importance to bring 
them under the first head ; but then the time when, is not 
so important as manner in lohich they are performed. 

The particular branch of your doctrine, to the discussion 
of which I called your attention in my last three letters, 
was that of fallen angels and a "personal devil. The next 
in order will T)e that of the trinity. And here, I wonld 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



107 



observe, I have altogether the advantage of you ; inasmuch 
as I have reason and common sense on my side of the 
question^ to begin with, and which I have no fears will 
lead me astray ; in addition to which, all the aid the Scrip- 
tures can yield either of us, will be on my side : for you 
maintain, in the first place, that the doctrine of the trinity 
is what reason and common sense cannot see through nor 
explain, and that reason is a dangerous guide to follow ; 
and secondly, that it is so sacred a mystery that no maji 
can understand or comprehend it, whether he be carnally, 
or spiritually minded. Of course it cannot be a matter of 
revelation : for revelation is that which makes manifest, 
or reveals to the understanding. But as the trinity cannot 
be understood, it, of course, has never been revealed. 
Hence, you can derive no aid either from reason or reve- 
lation. 

This doctrine is thus stated in your Confession of Faith, 
chap, ii : ^1, 3. " There is but one only living and true 
God, who is infinite in being and perfectioi^i a most pure 
spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions, immuta- 
ble, immense, eternal, incomprehensible," &;c. " In unity 
of the Godhead there be three persons of one substance, 
power, and eternity ; God the Father, God the Son, and 
God the Holy Ghost. The Father is of none, neither be- 
gotten nor proceeding ; the Son is eternally begotten of 
the Father ; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the 
Father and the Son." In the Larger Catechism, adopted by 
your church, and published with your Confession of Faith, 
we read : " There be three persons in the Godhead, the 
Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost ; and these three are 
one true eternal God, the same in substance, equal in power 
and glory : although distinguished by their personal pro- 
perties." 

On the perusal of the above language, methinks the 
serious, reflecting, and philosophical mind cannot but be 
forcibly struck with the remarkable contrast exhibited be- 
tween this language, and the simple, plain and intelligible 
language of the Bible. And with equal force, also, must 
such a mind be struck with the unintelligible jargon, abr 
surdity and contradictions contained in this language. I 
wish here to submit a few simple questions to your con- 
sideration. Is Jesus Christ the true and essential God ? 



108 



LETTERS TO REV. S. ' . AIKIN. 



You will doubtless answer, "Yes." Had he a body? 
"Yes." Had he parts? "Yes." Had he passions ? "Yes." 
Well, then, according to your Confession, he cannot be 
essentially God : for, as we have seen, that asserts that 
God is " without body, parts, or passions." 

Again, if the three persons in the Godhead are essen- 
tially one, whatever may be affirmed of one, may be affirm- 
ed of the others. If it may be said of the Son, "he is 
^ernally begotten," may not the same be affirmed of tte 
Father ? Should you answer, " No, it is absurd and con- 
trary to all reason and analogy to speak thus of the Fa- 
ther," I would then ask, Is it not equally absurd and con- 
trary to all analogy and reason, to say of the Son, he is 
eternally begotten ? Does not this sound very odd — eter- 
nally begotten ! Does not the very word begotten imply a 
particular time of begetting, and a time when the Son 
was not begotten 1 And is it not monstrously absurd, and 
even impossible, to say of a Son, he is as old as his Father ? 
But that thei -hree persons in your trinity are not essen- 
tially the same, is proved by the very language of ^^our 
Confession. For that maintains that the Father is always 
active, and the Son always passive ; the one always beget- 
ting, and the other always being begotten: and the Holy 
Ghost possessing still a different property, not common to 
either of the other two, neither begetting nor begotten, but 
proceeding. 

Again, as you maintain that the Father is God, the Son 
is God, and the Holy Ghost is God, and these three are 
one ; let me ask. Is the Son, the Father ? If you say 
" Yes," you give up the doctrine of the trinity, and allow, 
simply, that one and the same being is called by different 
Tmmes, the same as Paul and Saul signify the same being, 
or person ; or Joses, Barnabas, and Son of Consolation. 
(Acts iv : 36, and xiii : 9.) If you say " the Son is not 
the Father, but he is God; he is not the Holy Ghost, but 
he is God : and the Holy Ghost is not the Father, nor is 
he the Son, yet he is God ;" then let me ask, Have you 
not three Gods ? Most certainly you have. So take which 
horn of the dilemma you will, it does not relieve you of 
the difficulty. Should you now, to extricate y ourself from 
the difficulty, affirm that each of the three persons named 
is God in union^ or conjunction, with the other two, but 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 109 

neither is separately or alone God ; then you acknowledge 
the divisibility of God, and virtually divide Jam into three 
equal parts^ all of which, when united, make up, or con- 
stitute one God ! And hence, you might, with equal pro- 
priety, speak of one-third^ or two-thirds of the Godhead ! 

But let us trace this doctrine to its origin ; and Jearn, if 
possible, when and where it originated. Does the volume 
of Nature teach any such doctrine ? Is there any thing 
in the whole compass of man's observation, or of creation 
itself, that could suggest the most distant idea of such a 
doctrine ? No, nothing. Reason and philosophy say there 
cannot be, in the universe, more than one self-existent be- 
ing, and that this being must be undivided, and necessarily 
the cause of all other beings and existences. And while 
all will admit that it is absurd to suppose more causes than 
are necessary, none will deny that the Father, the self-ex- 
istent, unoriginated Jehovah, is a cause abundantly suffi- 
cient for nature and all its phenomena. Well, did God 
reveal himself to Adam as a tri-personal being, consisting 
of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ? Did Adam know any 
thing about the trinity? No, nothing. Did Moses, or the 
ancient patriarchs, or prophets of Israel, know or teach 
any thing of the trinity ? Not a syllable. On the contrary, 
they taught the " Lord our God is one Lord, and thou shalt 
have no other Gods beside me — There is no other God — 
Have we not all one Fath^:r? Hath not one God created 
us ?" The Old Testament contains nothing in allusion to 
so strange a theory, or that can, without the greatest vio- 
lence, be tortured into its support. 

Well, did Christ, or any of his apostles ever teach the 
doctrine of the trinity, or any thing that resembled it? I 
think no person, free from prejudice, sectarian bias, and 
the power of tradition, will assert that they did. For the 
New Testament contains no such language as Trinitarians 
now use to express that doctrine. No such expressions or 
phrases occur as, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost, Three 
pcrso7is in one God, Triune God, The eternal Three, God- 
man, Trinity, Human or Divine nature of Christ, eter- 
nally begotten, eternal procession, <fec. No, Sir, these phra- 
ses, so common in the writings of Trinitarians, are never 
found in the New Testament. But consider. Sir, would 
not some one of them be likely to be found there if the 

10 



110 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIK. 



trinity were, as you maintain, a fundamental doctrine of 
the Gospel ? Let candor give the answer. 

Not only is the New Testament silent as to any and all 
the phrases used by Trinitarians to express their faith, but, 
as I shall hereafter show, it decidedly opposes so strange 
and unnatural a theory. But, Sir, I am prepared to state, 
not only that neither Christ nor his apostles taught the 
doctrine of the trinity, but that it ivas^ not taught^ nor even 
named^ during the two or three first centuries ; at least not 
in the sense in which it is now held, if named at all. It 
is true, the paganizing Christians, and mystic philosophers 
of the Platonic and Peripatetic schools, began early to cor- 
rupt Christianity, and to seek to blend its doctrines with 
Polytheism and Paganism. But the doctrine of the trinity 
had not been established, nor even named, till the Council 
of Nice, assembled by Constantino, in the year 325. This 
Council, it appears, was called to settle a dispute which 
had arisen between Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria, and 
Arius, a Presbyter in the same church ; and, as might be 
expected, the Br^hop had the Presbyter expelled. It appears 
from Eutychius, the Patriarch of Alexandria,that there were 
two thousand and forty-eight Bishops met at Nice; that they 
had different opinions of the nature of Jesus Christ. Sabel- 
lius and his followers believed that Christ was derived from 
the Father, like a flame of fire hanging down from ano- 
ther, but not diminishing the first. Paul of Samosata, 
Patriarch of Antioch, and his followers, believed in the 
proper humanity of Christ ; but chosen by the grace of God 
to be the deliverer of mankind. And three hundred and 
eighteen Bishops believed in his equality with the Father. 
From hence, it appears there were one thousand seven 
hundred and thirty Bishops opposed to the doctrine of the 
equality of the Father and Son ; of course they were Uni- 
tarians : though entertaining different ideas respecting the 
nature of Christ, they had only one respecting the God and 
Father of all. Josephus, a native of Egypt, but a Christian 
priest, relates that " two thousand and forty-eight Bishops 
met at Nice, and the Emperor commanded that the creed 
drawn up by the Bishop of Jerusalem should be read in the 
Synod. Three hundred and eighteen Bishops embraced it, 
seventeen hundred and thirty differed in various ways, nei- 
ther agreeing in their sentiments nor any one article of faith.*' 



Letters to rev. s. c» aikin. 



Ill 



Ismael Ibu Ali, a Mahommedan historian of great repu- 
tation, also say«, " the aforesaid three hundred and eighteen 
Bishops moreover, assenting to the ordinance of Constan- 
tine, set forth the Christian faith in a different manner 
from what had been current as such heretofore." So that 
it is evident that not a sixth part of the Bishops present, 
(only three hundred and eighteen out of two thousand and 
forty-eight^,) could subscribe to the doctrine of the Nicene 
creed; but then it is presumed the Emperor's sword, put 
into the scale, was enough to turn the balance in favor of 
the Bishop of Alexandria. 

Notwithstanding the zeal with which Constantine es- 
poused the cause of Alexander, and decided against the 
voice of a vast majority of the Council, he soon repented 
of his then ultra-orthodoxy, banished the famous Athana- 
sius to Treves, recalled Arius, and died an Arian. Fur- 
thermore, the Council of Jerusalem received Arius ; and 
Constantius, abetting the dying sentiments of his father> 
established Arianism as the religion of his empire. 

But still, at this late period, the doctrine of the trinity 
seems not to have been known. Though the deity of 
Christ was advocated by a few, the deity of the Holy Ghost, 
and the inducting him as a third person into the trinity, 
had not yet been thought of. At 1-ength, after a long strug- 
gle between the followers of Arius and Sabellius, Athana- 
sius began to publish (about the year 363) his new doctrine 
of the Holy Spirit, with some degree of approbation ; and; 
having raised up a new party, Theodosius the Great called 
another general Council at Constantinople, A. D. 381 ; 
which adopted the Holy Ghost into (I had almost said 
the family of Gods) the holy trinity, as it then began to be 
called. 

Thus Athanasius, in the latter part of the fourth century, 
seems to have brought forth this doctrine, and may justly 
claim it as his own child. Gregory Nazianzen, in one of 
his orations, says, " When many were unsound in the faith 
concerning the Son, many more concerning the Spirit, and 
very few sound in both articles ; Athanasius was moved 
to assert of the Spirit, what others had done of the Son." 

The forty-five creed-making Councils that assembled 
during this century, and the rapidly accumulating cor- 
ruptions that began now to pour into the church from all 



112 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



quarters, put the finishing strokes to the doctrine of the 
trinity, and it was fixed during the long and dark ages of 
the church, much the same as it is now held forth by 
Trinitarian divines. It was conceived in sin and shapen 
in iniquity. But what is to me the most marvellous, is, that 
such a doctrine, so unfounded in reason and the word of 
God, unknown during the three first centuries of the Chris- 
tian era, brought fortJi and cherished in the darkness and 
corruptions of that age, should still be held in this enlight- 
ened age and country, by my good brethren the Presbyte- 
rians, and particularly by so sensible a man as Br. S. C» 
Aikin. 

I shall resume this subject in another letter, shortly. 
Yours, &c. 



LETTER XVII. 

The same subject continued. 

Dear Sir — Having, in my last, pointed out some of the 
absurdities involved in the doctrine of the trinity ; shown 
its opposition to reason and philosophy ; that it was un- 
known to the writers of the Old and New Testaments, 
neither of which contain any expressions like those em- 
ployed by Trinitarians ; and moreover, that the doctrine 
had its origin, with other kindred errors and absurdities, 
in the corruptions of Christianity that rapidly accumulated 
in the fourth century ; I shall now proceed. First, to ex- 
amine some of the principal arguments, pretended to be 
drawn from the Bible, in its support; and Secondly, to set 
forth the simple doctrine of the Scriptures in relation to 
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. 

Trinitarians imagine they discover proof of the trinity 
in the very first verse in the Bible ; and that in the books 
of Moses this proof is abundant ; from the fact, that Elo' 
him., the Hebrew word rendered God, is used in the plural 
number : and because Elohim (Gods, as you term the word) 
is joined wuth a singular verb, it therefore denotes trinity 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



113 



in unity. But, Sir, this is too puerile and childish an ar- 
gument to stand the test of enlightened reason and learned 
criticism. Calvin, himself, wholly disapproved of this 
argument, and says in relation to it, " that readers should 
he advised to beware of such violent coinments\^ And Dr. 
Edwards says, " some may think there lurks a mystery in 
the word Elohim constructed with a singular verb, deno- 
ting trinity in unity; but what shall be said of Adonim, Baa- 
lim, and even Behemoth, which you can read with a sin- 
gular adjunct. Job xiv: 10, which is perhaps used in the 
plural to express the vastness of the beast." The plural 
form of Elohim, (God,) as well as of the pronouns in va- 
rious places (as in Gen. i : 26, where " God said, let us 
make man in our image,^^) is perfectly consonant with the 
genius of the Hebrew language, and with the custom of 
all oriental nations, even though one person, in the singu- 
lar number only, is intended ; as every \ye\\ instructed 
scribe will tell you. It is used to denote dignity, authority, 
or greatness. But, Sir, suppose we grant that Elohim 
means, properly, Gods, in the plural, instead of God, in the 
singular — what will it prove in favor of Trinitarianism ? 
Just nothing at all : for it might as justly be supposed to 
teach tioo, four, ten, or an hundred Gods, as three. Nay, 
the polytheist might as well adduce this argument in favor 
of the thirty thousand gods of Hesiod, as the Trinitarian 
could in favor of his three. The Heathen nations among 
whom the Israelites sojourned, worshipped Elohim in many 
Gods : But to the Jews it was said, Hear, O Israel : the 
Lord, our Elohim, is one Lord." And Jesus, in quoting 
this, Mark xii : 39, says, " Kurios ho Theos sou, Kurios 
eis estin,^^ using Theos, God, in the singular number, and 
showing that it was so to be understood. 

Isa. ix : 6. " For unto us a child is born, unto us a son 
is given His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsel- 
lor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince 
of Peace," is frequently adduced in support of the absolute 
deity of Christ. But, Sir, let me ask, Who is the Giver 
of this Son ? Are the gift and the Giver one and the 
same ? And was the eternal, uncreated God ever conceived 
and born of a woman ? " His name shall be called,^^ &:c. 
But does calli, ^ this Son by these names, make him in 
feality, the setfexistent Jehovah ? If so, will not the 



114 



LETTERS TO RET. S. G. AIKIN. 



naming' of a son, Lemuel, (which signifies the strong God,) 
make him really a strong God 1 Will not the naming of 
a son, EUaby (which signifies God my Father,) make him 
in reality our God and Father ? Are we to consider all 
rnen that bear the names, Elijah, (God the Lord,) Eliel, 
(God my God,) and other Hebrew names of similar import, 
as in reality the same being which the names signify? 
Again, allowing Christ to be the mighty God, let me ask, 
how many mighty Gods wall it take to make one Almighty ? 
The phrase " everlasting Father,^^ according to all good 
critics, should be rendered. Father of the age. Some emi- 
nent scholars render the text, " The mighty God shall call 
him a wonderful Mediator, Father of his age, and the Prince 
of Peace." Abraham is called "the father of the faith- 
ful," and has been for ages past, and will be for ages to 
come, so called ; and hence, might properly be called. The 
everlasting (age lasting) father of the faithful. This text, 
therefore, affords your theory no support. 

John i : 1-3, is considered incontrovertible evidence of 
the absolute deity of Christ. " In the beginning was the 
word," &c. But I would ask. In the beginning of tvhat — 
was the word ? Was it in the beginning of God 1 Did 
God ever have a beginning ? No. It must be, then, in 
the beginning of the creation ; or perhaps, more properly, 
in the beginning of the Gospel dispensation, or of the new 
creation, which w^as committed t(^ nim to accomplish, and 
by whose instrumentality and authority all things were to 
be renewed. Calvin says, Christ made all things new, 
omnia fecit nova Christus, And the apostles speak of the 
regeneration, but not of the original creation of all things 
by Christ ; unless it be, as same suppose, by him as the 
medium or instrument. It shbuld, however, be observed, 
the word egeneto, in the 3d verse, rendered made, never 
signifies to create, in the New Testament, although it oc- 
curs more than seven hundred times. It signifies to he, to 
become, to be done, to happen. The text, therefore, pro- 
perly signifies that all things in the Gospel economy were 
done by the authority or direction of the Messiah. But 
if, by the Word, here mentioned, we are to understand the 
Supreme Jehovah, is there any sense in the expression, 
" the Word was with God" ? Does it mear. that God was 
with himself? " The Word tvas God." But they were 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



115 



called gods to whom the word of God came"—" there be 
gods many and lords many" (see the word gods in the ori- 
ginal, or in the marginal readings, in the following texts : 
Exod. XV : 11, xxi : 6, xxii : 8, 9, 28 ; Deut. x : 17 ; 1 Sam. 
xxviii : 13 ; Ps. viii : 5, Ixxxii : 1.) though " to us" says 
the apostle, " there is but one God, the Father." John x : 
34, 35; 1 Cor. viii: 5, 6. God says to Moses, "See I 
have made if^ee ft ^oc? unto Pharaoh." Exod. vii : 1. Thus 
you will perceive the word god is frequently used in the 
Scriptures in a subordinate sense. And whenever it is 
applied to any other person or being, except the " Father 
of the spirits of all flesh," it must evidently be used in a 
subordinate sense ; for God is one^ and his name One, 

Another text supposed to favor the doctrine under con- 
sideration, is John x : 30. " I and my Father are one." 
But, Sir, let me ask, what evidence this affords in your 
favor? Does it mean oneness of person? or oneness of 
being ? or simply oneness or unison of design ? If the 
first, it overthrows your disiinctioji or plurality of persons 
in the Godhead. If the second, it proves that all of whom 
this oneness is affirmed are in reality but one being, e. g. 
" Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which 
shall believe on me through their word, that they all may 
be one ; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they 
also may be one in us" — " that they may be one even as we 
are one,^^ John xvii : 20-22. Then, of course, God the 
Father, Christ the Son, and all the thousands of believers 
that ever have, and ever shall live, constitute but one be- 
ing ! St. Paul says, " I have planted, Apollos watered" — 
" Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one,^^ 1 
Cor. iii : 6, 8. Of course, Paul and Apollos were but one 
person, one being, by this Trinitarian logic ! Tertullian 
observes, that the expression is unum^ one thing, not one 
person; and he explains it to mean unity, likeness, con- 
junction, and the lorn the Father bore to the So?i, Origen 
says, let him consider that text, all that believed were of 
one heart and of one soul, and then he will understand this, 
I and my Father are one. The numeral adjective, en in 
the Greek, and unum in the Latin, being in the neuter gen- 
der, neither agrees with the pronoun /, nor the word Father, 
and therefore, signifies not unity of person or being, but 
agreement of society, harmony of purpose and design. 



116 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKlK. 



1 Tim. iii : 16, needs only to be correctly translated, to 
show that it affords your theory no support. Dr. Adam. 
Clarke, who wished to make every text bend to the sup- 
port of the trinit}'', that he possibly could, confesses, We 
are perplexed by various readings on the first clause, Tkeos 
ephanerothe en sarki^ God was manifest in the flesh : for 
instead of Theos^ God, several Mss. versions and fathers 
have OS or o, which or who. And this is generally referred 
to the word mystery : ' Great is the mystery of godliness 
which was manifested in the flesh.' Agreeable to Gries- 
bach's punctuation, and a correct translation from the best 
Greek Mss. the text should read (including the last clause 
of the 15th verse) thus : " The pillar and firm support of 
the truth (and confessedly great) is this mystery of godli- 
ness : He who was manifested in flesh, justified in spirit, 
hath appeared to messengers, been proclaimed among na- 
tions, believed on in the world, taken up in glory." 

I will next offer a few remarks on Heb. i : 8. Here 
again we have reason to believe our common version does 
not present us with a true and proper translation. We 
have the authority of many great and good men for ren- 
dering it thus : " But to the Son, [he saith,] God is thy 
throne to the age of the age." By thus rendering the text 
correctly, all obscurity disappears. The 6th verse of this 
chapter, which is generally supposed to teach that divine 
worship is due to Jesus, I conceive is properly rendered 
thus : " let all the messengers of God pay homage, 
or reverence, to him." The word proskuneo, repre- 
sents that civil homage which was usually paid to distin- 
guished persons in oriental countries. See the Septuagint, 
Gen. xxiii : 7, 12 ; 1 Chron. xxix : 20 ; Dan. ii : 46, and 
in the New Testament, Matt, viii : 2, xviii : 26 ; Acts x : 
25, where the word proskuneo, here rendered worship, oc- 
curs. But the context in Heb. i : particularly verse 9, 
shows that the apostle was very far from believing Jesus 
Christ to be the supreme Jehovah, entitled to supreme ado- 
ration — " Therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed 
thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows." Now 
Jesus has a God. Has the Father a God ? And who were 
the fellows or companions of Jesus ? Were they the Fa- 
ther and Holy Ghost ? If so, then Jesus, the Christ, is not 
merely equal to, but above them, since his anointing. But 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



117 



if men, prophets or patriarchs, or angels, or even arch-an- 
gels were his felloios or companions ^ then there would be 
a propriety in saying hejwas anointed above them. 

1 John V : 7. " For there are three that bear record in 
heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and these 
three are one," is so manifestly spurious, an entire forgery, 
and no part of St. John's writing, that it would be a waste 
of time to remark on it, except to present the evidence of 
its spuriousness, for which purpose I insert the note^ be- 
low, which is taken from the Improved Version of the New 
Testament. 

I have now examined some of the principal arguments 
and Scriptures commonly adduced by Trinitarians in favor 
of their hypothesis, and all, I believe, on which much reli- 
ance is placed by you ; and find the doctrine of the trinity 
" weighed in the balance and found wanting." I shall 
therefore proceed to make a few more brief remarks on the 
subject, present you with the simple doctrine of the Bible, 
and then dismiss the theme. 

It appears to me, Sir, that a doctrine so mysterious, or 
rather, so absurd, inconsistent and contradictory, as that 
of the trinity, should never be admitted, much less believed 
or pretended to be believed, without the fullest and most 

* 1. This text concerning the heavenly witnesses, is not contain- 
ed in any Greek manuscript v^^hich w^as written earlier than the fif- 
teenth century. 2. Nor in any Latin manuscript earlier than the ninth 
century. 3. It is not found in any of the ancient versions. 4. It is 
not cited by any of the Greek ecclesiastical writers, though to prove 
the doctrine of the trinity they have cited the words both before and 
after this text. 5. It is not cited by any of the early Latin fathers, 
even when the subjects upon which they treat, would naturally have 
led them to appeal to its authority. 6. It is first cited by Virgilius 
Tapsensis, a Latin writer of no credit, in the latter end of the fifth 
century, and by him it is suspected to have been forced. 7. It has 
been omitted as spurious in many editions of the New Testament since 
the Reformation : — in the two first of Erasmus, in those of Aldus, 
Colingeus, Zuinglius, and lately of Griesbach. 8. It was omitted by 
Luther, in his German version. In the old English Bibles of Henry 
VIII., Edward VI. and Elizabeth, it was printed in small types, or 
included in brackets : but between the years 1566 and 1580, it began 
to be printed as it now stands ; by whose authority, is not known. — 
See Travis' Letters to Gibbon, and Porson's to Travis. Also, Gries- 
bach's excellent dissertation on the text, at the end of the second vo- 
lume. Archbishop Newcome omits the text, and the Bishop of Lin- 
coln expresses his conviction that it is spurious. Elem, of TheoK 
vol, ii. p. 90, note," 



lis 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. Alkili. 



unequivocal evidence from the word of God. And cer- 
tainly the word of God can never countenance an absurd 
and contradictory doctrine. But the trinity is attempted 
to be supported by a few isolated texts, figurative expres- 
sions, and mis-translations of Scripture, and in opposition 
to reason, the general tenor of the Bible, and scores of 
plain, positive, and unequivocal passages. 

The frequent shifting of their ground, and the disinge- 
nuous quibbling of Trinitarians, when arguing on the sub* 
ject, very clearly evince the want of any solid foundation 
on which to build their doctrine. For instance, when they 
are reminded of the apparent weakness and dependence of 
Jesus — that he was once a weak and helpless infant- — that 
he increased in stature, and in favor with God and man — 
that he was w^eary and faint, hungered, thirsted, wept, re- 
joiced, and prayed — was grieved and tempted, betrayed 
and in agony — that he bled, and died, and was buried ; the 
reply they make generally is, that these things are said of 
his human nature — that some things are said of him as a 
man^ and others as God, But why does not the Bible make 
this distinction between his tioo natures, if it existed ? Why 
does not Jesus himself make the distinction, and tell his 
disciples when they are to understand his human nature 
as speaking, and when the divine ? When he says, " the 
Father is greater than I," which nature did he intend 1 If 
the human nature merely, he gave no instruction on the 
subject ; for the disciples, and every body else knew that 
God was greater than man. If he meant the divine nature, 
then your system would be overthrown at once, and the 
inferiority of the Son is manifest. When he says, " I can 
of mine own self do nothing," why does he not add, by way 
of explanation, "that is, my human nature can do nothing, 
but my divine nature can do all things." But instead of 
this, he says, " my Father — he doeth the work-" We find 
nothing of this distinction between the two supposed na- 
tures of Christ, either in his own instructions, or those of 
any of his disciples or his historians ; nor no intimation 
but what the whole of what constituted Christ Jesus 
(whether one or tivo natures) was intended and included 
whenever he spoke of himself. But if either part of his 
nature were the essential Divinity, why does he exclaim 
when on the cross, " My God, my God, why hast thou for- 



LfiTTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



119 



gaken me ?" Had one part of his nature forsaken the other 1 
Why does he afterwards say, " Father, into thy hands I 
commend my spirit ?" Why not say, I commend my hu- 
man nature into the care of my divine nature ? It appears 
to me, Sir, that this attempt to make a distinction where 
neither God, nor Christ, nor any inspired writer has made 
one, manifests the weakness of your cause. 

It is true, Jesus says, " I have power to lay down my 
life, and I have power to take it again and again, " All 
power is given me in heaven and in earth but in the for- 
mer case he immediately explains himself, by saying, 
" This commandment have I received of my Father and 
in the latter case the very expression shows that the power 
was not originally and inherently in himself ; but was 
given him of the Father. Indeed, in all he said, he ac- . 
knowledged his inferiority to, and dependence on, the Fa- 
ther. He says, " I came down from heaven, not to do mine 
own will, but the will of him that sent me." Therefore, 
he says, " not my will, but thine be done." " My doctrine 
is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do his 
will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, 

or whether I speak of myself. When ye have lifted up 

the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and 
that I do nothing of myself ; but as my Father hath taught 

me, I speak these things I speak that which I have 

seen with my Father For my Father is greater than 

I." John vi : 3S, vii : 16, 17, viii : 28, 38, xiv : 28. ^ 
But, Sir, notwithstanding I deny the doctrine of the 
trinity, and the supreme deity of Christ, because not taught 
in, but directly opposed to the Bible, and maintain the de- 
pendence and inferiority of the Son to the Father, I never- 
theless maintain and firmly believe that his doctrine is the 
doctrine of God ; his authority, the authority of God ; his 
miracles, the miracles of God ; and his salvation, the sal- 
vation of God. For God gave the world the doctrine, 
through him, commissioned him " to bear witness to the 
truth," to work miracles in his name, and to accomplish 
the great work of salvation. Acts ii : 22-24, xiii : 23 ; 
Luke i : 68, 69 ; John xviii : 37 ; Isa. xlix : 6. There- 
fore, I hold that a)l men should honor the Son as they 
honor the Father, i. e. they should honor the Father 
through the Son. For to dishonor the Son, would be to 



120 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



dishonor God ; for God sent him. Should the government 
of France send a minister plenipotentiary to this country, 
on civil affairs, an insult offered to him v^ould be an insult 
offered to the government of France, and an honor done 
to him would be an honor done to France ; and his au- 
thority to transact civil affairs would be the authority of 
France, for that authority had been delegated to, and vested 
in him. It therefore detracts nothing, either from the au- 
thority or efficacy of the Gospel dispensation, to deny the 
absolute deity of Christ, any more than it detracts from 
the authority of the lata, given to the Israelites, to deny 
the absolute deity of Moses, by, or through whom that 
law was dispensed. 

The simple and plain doctrine of the Gospel seems to 
be this — 1. That there is one, and but one, self-existent 
and eternal God ; and this one God is the Father only. 
For, says Paul, to us there is but one God, the Father, 
of whom are all things, and we in him." 1 Cor. viii : 6. 
" One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through 
all, and in you all." Eph. iv : 6. " There is one God, and 
one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Je- 
sus." 1 Tim. ii : 5. Now, it must be evident that this 
one mediator between God and men, cannot be that God, 
between whom, and men, he is the mediator — in other 
words, he cannot be the mediator between hinuelf ?cci^ men. 
" Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one." 
,Gal. iii : 20 ; Deut. vi : 4 ; Isa. xlv : 5, 18, 22 ; Mai. ii : 
10; Markxii: 29; Acts xvii : 24-29. 

2. That Jesus Christ is tho one mediator between God 
and men, the promised Messiah, " declared to be the Son 
of God with power," and " the Saviour of the w^orld," 
" the image of the invisible God," (of course not that God, 
of whom he is the Son and the image,) " the brightness of 
the Father's glory, and the express image of his person" — 
that to him the divine spirit was given without measure, 
and hence, God " hath made him both Lord and Christ," 
and given him power over all flesh. That it pleased the 
Father that in him should all fulness dwell ; and hence, 
he is called the beginning (or chief) of the creation of God, 
the first born of every creature, the first begotten of the 
dead, that in all things he might have the pre-eminence — 
that these exalted titles, and this high authority and power 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



121 



were given him for a specific purpose, i. e. that he should 
give eternal life to as many as the Father had given him, 
bring many sons and daughters to glory, and reconcile all 
things unto God ; and that when this glorious work shall 
he accomplished, he is again to resign that authority and 
power into the hands of him who gave it, deliver up the 
kingdom to God the Father, and God to become all in all. 
(1 Cor. XV : 28.) This, Sir, is a scriptural, consistent, glo- 
rious, and consoling view of this subject. 

3. The personality of the Holy Ghost, as one distinct 
person in the Godhead, separate from the personality of 
the Father, is a mere phantom of the imagination, or the 
invention of the clergy in the dark ages of the church, to 
gratify their love of mystery, and remove the faith of Chris- 
tians from the simplicity of the Gospel. The word Ghost 
is an improper, or at least an inelegant translation of the 
Greek pneiima^ in other places rendered spirit. The di- 
vine^ or holy spirit signifies, not a distinct person in the 
Godhead, but the energy^ power ^ sufficiency^ influence^ and 
sometimes the consolation of God, These, I think, will 
be found to be the only senses in which the phrase Holy 
Ghost ^ or Divine Spirit y is used, unless, perhaps, in some 
few cases it be used expletively for God. 

Thus, Sir, I have shown the doctrine of the trinity, on 
which you place so much stress, to be without any solid 
foundation, either in reason or Scripture ; and not only so, 
but directly opposed to both. I now leave you and an en- 
lightened public to judge, whether this doctrine ought any 
longer to receive the countenance and support of reasona- 
ble and enlightened men, professing faith in Christianity. 

In my next, I propose examining the doctrine of atone- 
ment, as held by Presbyterians. 

Yours, &c. 



11 



LETTER XVIII, 



On the doctrine of the Atonement, 

Dear Sir — Agreeably to the promise I made in my last 
letter to you on the doctrine of the trinity, I now propose 
to call your attention to the subject of the atonement, as 
held by Presbyterians. And here I must premise, that, as 
the doctrines of Presbyterians have undergone several ma- 
terial alterations and modifications since I commenced this 
series of letters — at least in the manner of preaching them, 
if not in your Confession of Faith — and as there are di- 
verse views entertained by the clergy of your order rela- 
tive to the same doctrines — doctrines too, deemed funda- 
mental—and as I am not certain what particular views you 
may entertain of all those doctrines ; I shall be under the 
necessity of so far varying the style and matter of my future 
letters from that of the former, as to suit them to the cir- 
cumstances of the case. I am happy, however, to remark, 
that wherever I might be at a loss, in ascertaining the pre- 
cise views of 3^our sect or any part thereof, from the manner 
and matter of your preaching, I may still safely take your 
Confession of Faith, including the Larger and Shorter 
Catechisms, as the proper standard ; and that I shall be 
perfectly safe and right in holding you and all 3^our clergy 
to defend whatever doctrines that contains ; inasmuch as 
your General Assembly, convened at Philadelphia, in May 
last, unanimously resolved to retain the Confession of 
Faith without alteration. And, as to the question whether 
the Catechisms, Larger or Shorter, are to be considered as 
a part of the standards of our church, and are compre- 
hended in the words * Confession of Faith of this church^'' 
the committee answer unhesitatingly in the affirmative 
and a resolution was adopted, stating " that the Larger and 
Shorter Catechisms of the Westminster Assembly of di- 
vines are included, and do constitute an integral part of the 
standard of this church." 

I believe that, however widely your clergy and church 
may, and actually do, differ from each other, as to the ex- 
tent and efficacy of the atonement, you are all agreed as to 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN, 



123 



its nature and design, I shall first notice your views of 
the nature and design of the atonement ; and secondly, of 
its extent and efficacy. 

From the general strain of your preaching and that of 
your order, as well as from numerous expressions in your 
Confession of Faith, I am justified in saying you hold the 
doctrine of the vicarious sufferings of Christ something 
like the following. In one sense, which may be called the 
legal sense, you represent man as a dehtor to God, to an 
infinite amount, and having nothing with which to pay the 
debt, and God refusing to forgive it, Christ by his suffer- 
ings and death pays the debt in full, and thus satisfies the 
legal claims of the Father. In another and judicial sense, 
you consider man as s. criminal m^nitely guilty, and justly 
exposed to infinite and unending torment as the penalty of 
of his crimes ; and as God would not, and could not justly 
pardon, even on repentance, without wreaking his ven- 
geance, either on the real criminal or a substitute, Christ 
voluntarily offered himself as a substitute, and endured the 
full penalty incurred by guilty man, satisfied tke justice 
of God, 

" And quenched his Father's flaming sword 
In his own vital blood." 

In either case, the debt is paid, the penalty endured, no^ 
by the debtor or the culprit, but by a substitute, by which 
the justice of God is satisfied, he is reconciled to his crea- 
ture, and salvation from deserved punishment is the result. 

To this view of the subject, there are, Sir, in my hum- 
ble opinion, insuperable objections — objections not only 
from reason, Scripture and the nature of the subject, but 
objections also arising from other parts of your own theory, 
that must make a perfect medley of confusion with your 
whole system. Some of these objections I shall now pro- 
ceed to point out. 

1. This view of the subject ascribes the most glaring in- 
justice to the Divine Being. It exhibits a principle in 
Deity, which, if put in practice among men, would be un- 
just, licentious in the extreme, and fatal to the safety and 
peace of society. And can that be justice in God which 
would be the grossest injustice in man ? What, let me ask, 
could be more unjust than to inflict punishment, as such, 
on the innocent who has never offended, when it has been 



124 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



deserved only by the guilty t And what could be more 
licentious, than to let the sinner, hardened in crime, go 
unpunished, and be assured that whatever crimes he had 
committed or might perpetrate, he could escape all punish- 
ment, and that the full penalty of all his guilt, and the full 
payment of all his debt, would be endured and cancelled 
by a substitute ? The doctrine of Universalism, however 
frequently charged by you with licentiousness, has no such 
salvo as this for the guilty conscience — holds out no such 
encouragements of impunity to transgressors. If it did, 
you might well consider it of immoral and licentious ten- 
dency. Again, let me ask, aside from the consideration of 
the injustice which your views ascribe to the Deity, and 
the licentiousness of their tendency, of what possible bene- 
fit or moral advantage, could the sufferings of an innocent 
person be, in themselves considered, to a hardened and 
guilty sinner ? Can they soften his heart — subdue his pro- 
pensity to sin — reform his life — make him a better man 1 
I can see in them no tendency to this. Let us suppose a 
case : Here is a criminal condemned, and justly, to suffer 
imprisonment and perform hard labor in the penitentiary, 
for the term of ten years. A substitute comes forward 
and offers, in his stead, to endure the imprisonment and 
perform the hard labor, and let the culprit go clear of all 
punishment. Would this, think you, reform the criminal? 
Would it be of any moral advantage to him, or render so- 
ciety any more safe from his future depredations ? Would 
it not rather encourage him to go on in iniquity with the 
expectation of impunity for the future as well as the pre- 
sent And would not that Legislature, Governor, or ex- 
ecutive power, among men, be deemed criminally unjust, 
and regardless of right, that should accept of such substi- 
tute, even if offered, and let the guilty go unpunished'? 

2. The theory I am now examining, represents God as a 
changeable being; as first hating, or being exceedingly 
wrathful against his sinful creatures, and then loving 
them — as having been once an irreconciled, and bitter ene- 
my, and afterwards becoming reconciled, friendly and pla- 
cable to the same creatures ; and that too from a motive 
and principle that would dishonor any being he has ever 
created. Reason and revelation both unite in testifying 
that God is of one mind, and none can turn him — no not 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



135 



even Christ can change the mind of God — for he is loith- 
out variableness or the shado^v of turning. How then 
could the sufferings of Christ change the feelings of the 
immutable Jehovah towards the creatures of his power ? 

3. Other parts of your own theory are utterly irrecon- 
cileable with this view of atonement. This is particularly 
the case with the doctrine of the trinity, considered in my 
last letter, of which you are a staunch advocate. Any 
attempt to reconcile the two doctrines, must involve the 
following absurdities — i. e. allowing the Son to be the 
self-existent eternal God. Man, by his sins, has forfeited 
the divine favor, incurred an infinite debt, an infinite pen- 
alty — God is dreadfully enraged at his offending offspring — 
determined to inflict on the criminal the vengeance due to 
his crimes, and to exact the last farthing of the helpless 
debtor — the debtor has nothing to pay, the criminal cannot 
be justly punished short of an eternity of misery — God 
will not relinquish one iota of his claim — what is to be 
donel Why, God concludes to pay the debt himself, for 
which he holds a legal claim, and to suffer the penalty 
himself which his vindictive justice demands as a satisfac- 
tion for his violated law i 

This view inevitably follows, so far as you maintain the 
identity of Christ with the eternal God. But so far as 
you deviate from this, and allow two disti?ict beings, or 
personages, represented, you involve yourself in other 
equally disagreeable dilemmas. You take away all the 
amiable attributes of the Father's character, to bestow them 
on the Son, or else deny that man has received any bene- 
fit through Christ's sufferings. For if the Father was 
inflexibly severe, and would not, even on repentance, re- 
ceive his offending children into his favor, without exact- 
ing the most dreadful sufferings of an innocent being, 
where is there any just ground of gratitude and love to 
him? He has relinquished none of the debt — it has all 
been paid by our bondman : He has remitted none of the 
penalty — it has all been suffered by our substitute. Where 
then is there any mercy, condescension, love, or benevo- 
lence in God 1 There is none. And again, if man is still 
liable to be sentenced, by Christ the Judge, to never-end- 
ing misery, as the penalty of his crimes, (as many of your 
preachers and I believe yourself maintain,) where is there 



126 



LETTfiRS to REV. S. C. AlKlN* 



any benefit derived to man in any possible manner by 
Christ's sufferings 1 It is true, the justice of God has been 
satisfied — his claim has been cancelled, so far as the Fa- 
ther is concerned ; but the claim is transferred from the 
Father to the Son ; and the latter has both the power and 
the right of enforcing the claim and inflicting the penalty 
to the full extent. Wherein then has man received any 
benefit ? 

But these are not all the difficulties and absurdities in- 
volved in your theory. For if sin be an infinite evil, and 
justly demerit an infinite penalty, it were utterly impossi- 
ble for Christ to have endured the full amount of this 
penalty during the short period in which he suffered — this 
were impossible, even allowing your Trinitarian notion 
of the absolute deity of Christ to be correct. For even 
you yourself will not allow that any thing more than his 
human nature suffered on the cross — you will not under- 
take to maintain the actual sufferings of the real Divinity. 
Therefore, the sufferings could not have been equivalent 
to the penalty demanded, according to your theory. But 
even admitting the deity of the sufferer, and that infinite 
torments were actually endured by the supreme Divinity, 
as an atonement for sin, and yet maintaining, according to 
your theory, the infinity of sin, the infinite guilt of every 
transgression, you will see the utter inadequacy of the 
atonement by sufferings, to remove and cancel sin. For 
the sufferings could have been no more than infinite ; of 
course, could have merely equalled^ or balanced (not can- 
celled, removed, or overcome) ojie single sin of one single 
individual of the whole human family — of course all the 
rest of the sins of that one individual, and all the sins of 
the whole world besides, must forever remain unatoned 
for, unless the Deity suffers as many deaths as there ever 
have been, and will be sins committed from the beginning 
of the world to the end of time ! These, Sir, are a few of 
the inconsistencies and absurdities involved by the pre- 
mises of your theory — infinite sin, infinite guilt, infinite 
penalties, infinite atonement, satisfaction and vicarious suf- 
ferings. Wrong premises invariably induce wrong con- 
clusions. It is not, Sir, the doctrine of atonement sanc- 
tioned by Scripture and reason, that thus involves you in 
the absurd mysticisms, contradictory jargon,and perplexing 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



127 



labyrinths above noticed ; it is your attachment to creeds 
and dogmas of men^ conceived in the dark ages of sin, and 
brought forth in the workings of the mystery of iniquity. 
Relinquish this attachment and take the Bible, explained 
by the light of reason, and the subject will appear clear, 
intelligible and beautiful. 

Reason and revelation both unite in attesting the origi- 
nal, inherent, unpurchased and unpurchaseable, universal, 
everlasting and immutable benevolence of God — in attest- 
ing the perfect harmony of all his attributes, that "justice 
and judgment are the habitation of his throne, mercy and 
truth go before his face" — that justice and mercy can ne- 
ver be at variance — that no offerings, sacrifices, or suffer- 
ings of any being in the universe can divert either of them 
from the object both unitedly have in view — the securing 
the holiness and best good of his own creation — that he is 
a JUST Qod AND a Saviour, 

The Scriptures, so far from teaching either the impunity 
of actual transgressors, or the infliction of the penalty due 
to sinners on a substitute, positively declare that God " will 
BY NO MEANS, clear the guilty." ''The soul that sinneth, 
it shall die." " Every one shall die for his oivn iniquity — 
every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set 
on edge." " The son shall not die for the father, nor the 
father for the son." But he that doeth wrong, shall re- 
ceive for the wrong that he hath done." God, ** without 
respect of persons, judgeth according to every man's work." 
" Who will render to every man according as his work 
shall be." But so far from teaching that these punish- 
ments are infinite in degree and endless in duration, or 
precluding the idea o^ forgiveness of si7i, in the scriptural 
sense of that phrase, forgiveness of it too without the con- 
sideration of an innocent person suffering in the place of 
the transgressor, the Scriptures clearly assert the contrary. 
The Psalmist declares, " Thou wast a God that forgavest 
them, though thou tookest vengeance of their inventions." 
And God says, by the prophet Isaiah, " I, even I, am he 
that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, 
[not for the sake, or on account of the sufferings of ano- 
ther,] and will not remember thy sins." Again, " Let the 
wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his 
thoughts : and let him return unto the Lord, and- he will 



128 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



have mercy upon him ; and to our God, for he will abun- 
dantly pardon." By a connected view of these and other 
similar passages, you will perceive the harmony of justice 
and mercy in the divine Being — that they go hand in hand 
in effecting the reformation and salvation of the sinner — 
that punishment is a personal concern, in which each sin- 
ner must bear his part and suffer for his own iniquities, 
and yet that divine forgiveness is necessary, and shall be 
experienced by the sinner, but only in and by his reforma- 
tion and deliverance from the power and dominion of sin. 
An epitome of the whole process may be seen in the beau- 
tiful parable of the prodigal son — his sin, guilt, condem- 
nation, misery, or punishment, repentance, reformation, 
forgiveness and happiness ; and all without the least pos- 
sible change in the feelings, affections, or disposition of the 
father. 

I shall reserve the further consideration of this subject 
till my next. In the mean time, believe me, dear Sir, as 
ever, Very respectfully yours, &c. 



LETTER XIX. 

The same subject continued. 

Dear Sir — There are many Christians, no doubt very 
honest and sincere, who believe with you in the vicarious 
sufferings and atonement of Christ, as the sine qua non of 
the Christian faith ; but who, nevertheless, have no distinct 
or definite ideas of salvation by Christ. It is to them all 
wrapt in mystery. They have a vague and inexplicable 
idea floating in their minds of the imputation of their sins 
to Christ, and of his righteousness to them by means of 
his suffering ; and of their own salvation, which they make 
to consist in exemption from deserved punishment — a kind 
of salvation, by the bye, nowhere taught in the Scrip- 
tures — but how, or in what manner this is morally effected, 
they cannot tell : and I very seriously doubt whether it is 
in your power to inform them. 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



12^ 



To talk of salvation by Christ, or by the blood of Christ, 
without being made morally better, without individual re- 
formation and personal holiness, or to talk of the salvation 
of sinners by mere faiih in the sufferings of Christ in their 
stead, is to talk without meaning, and to assume princi- 
ples, the utility and application of which, none can under* 
stand. I know there are a few passages of Scripture, 
which, if understood in a strictly literal sense, might seem 
to favor some part or parts of the theory I am now exam** 
ining. But on comparing Scripture with Scripture, and 
taking into consideration the fact that the language and 
writings of all the oriental nations, but more especially' 
those of the Hebrews, abounded with figurative expres- 
sions, with symbols, metaphors, parables and hyperboles, 
it will be perceived that nothing is said upon this subject, 
but what, when fully understood, is perfectly reconcileable 
with reason and sound philosophy. A few examples will 
now be introduced in confirmation of this statement, and 
calculated to have a bearing upon our subject. 

John vi : 55, 56. Christ says, " My flesh is meat indeed, 
and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh 
and drinketh my blood, dwelieth in me and I in him." ^In 
verse 51, he had said, " I am the living bread which came 
down from heaven : if any ma a eat of this bread, he shall 
live forever. And the bread that I v/ill give, is my flesh, 
which I will give for the life of the world." Now, why 
not understand and explain these words in a strictly literal 
sense ? Why, because Christ himself has explained his 
meaning otherwise in verse 63, where he says, " It is the 
spirit that quickeneth ; the flesh profiteth nothing : the 
words that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they are 
life — " thereby clearly explaining the truth, according to 
reason and philosophy, that it was the teachings^ the doc- 
trines^ the principles of his religion, and not the outward 
man or body of Christ — literally his flesh and blood — that 
possessed the quickening, nourishing, sustaining and life- 
giving power for the soul or mind of the believer, who 
received and obeyed his religion. And when he says, of 
the bread and wine in the supper, " this is my body" — 
"this is my blood" — nearly the same thing is intended, and 
Protestants are at no loss in understanding his meaning. 
And now, unless you are willing to allow that we should 



130 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIItlN. 



use our reason in understanding and explaining all similar 
passages, that speak of the redeeming efficacy of the blood 
of Christ, 3^011 ought at once, to be consistent, to turn 
Catholic, and contend for the doctrine of transuhstantiatio7i, 
1 Peier iii : 18. " For Christ also hath once suffered for 
sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to 
God :" That is, Christ, being just, hath once suffered in 
consequence of the sins, and in behalf of the unjust, that 
by his mediation he mJght reconcile and bring them to 
God. 2 Cor. v : 21. For he hath made him to be sin 
for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the right- 
eousness of God in him" — That is, he hath permitted him 
who never committed any sin, to be accounted and treated 
as a sinner^ that we might thereby be convinced of our 
sins, (Jude 15,) reconciled to God and conformed to his 
righteousness. Isa. liii : 4. " Surely he hath borne our 
griefs and carried our sorrows," &:c. See this explained, 
Matt, viii : 16, 17. " And he cast out the spirits with his 
word, and healed all that were sick : that it might be ful- 
filled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, 
Himself took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses.'' — 
The removal, by Christ, of the natural evils and maladies 
to which mankind were subject, was a lively representa- 
tion of his office and labors, in removing their moral mala- 
dies by enlightening their minds and reforming their lives. 
The ne^t verse in Isaiah, you doubtless consider one of 
the strongest contained in all the Bible in favor of your 
theory of substitution. " But he was wounded for our 
transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities : the chas- 
tisement of our peace was upon him ; and with his stripes 
we are healed," This verse may be thus paraphrased : 
He was wounded in consequence of our transgressions ; 
he was bruised on account of our iniquities : he endured 
the chastisement consequent upon his undertaking to effect 
our peace ; and though he suffers many stripes, yet by his 
labors we are healed. The langudge of the above text is 
highly figurative and symbolical, as are also many other 
texts relating to the subject ; yet I think I have given the 
sense intended by the inspired writer. This will appear 
further obvious by considering the 11th verse, vi^hich de- 
clares, that " by his knoxdedge [not barely by his suffer- 
ings] shall my lighteous servant justify [the] many, [or 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN* 



131 



the multitude,] i. e. by the knowledge which he will im- 
part, he shall bring- them to justification ; " for he shall 
bear their iniquities," i. e. remove them, the same as his 
bearing their sicknesses signified his removing them — 
" God sent him to bless you in turning away every one of 
you from his iniquities." Acts iii : 26. 

Christ (to use the beautiful language of the amiable 
and justly celebrated Richard Wright,) is said to redeem 
us to God by his blood, because it cost him his life to bring 
the Gospel, with all its light and blessings, to the world; 
because he patiently submitted to all his sufierings, in pur- 
suance of the great object he had before him, the salvation 
of men; because his death was the confirmation of his 
testimony, and he sealed the truth and grace of God with 
his blood; and because in consequence of his obedience, 
even unto death he is rew^arded with the dignity and power 
to w^hich be is exalted, as a Prince and a Saviour, in the 
exercise of which he dispenses redemption by the Gospel. 
No rational idea can be formed of the ^vay in which we 
are redeemed by the blood of Christ, otherwise than -as 
his death stands connected with the Gospel, and his minis- 
tration at the head of the dispensation. Thus it appears 
that we have redemption in Christ Jesus as we have it in 
his Gospel ; he came and revealed it, he lost his life in 
m^aking it known, he is appointed by the Father to dispense 
it, and we enjoy it so far as we conform to his teaching 
and example. 

" The redemption which w^e have in Christ Jesus, is not 
described as a legal transaction between him and the Fa- 
ther, a settling of accounts with divine justice by ihe pay- 
ment of our debts, or as consisting in removing by his 
death the encumbrances which stopped the course of di- 
vine mercy, and so rendering God propitious to sinners ; 
but as consisting in our actual deliverance from ignorance, 
condemnation of conscience, moral pollution and death. 

" It is by the Gospel we are actually redeemed. By it5 
light we are delivered back from a state of ignorance and 
blindness of mind. By its teaching and influence we are 
freed from inward condemnation, from the love, power and 
practice of sin, and, by what it reveals respecting a stat« 
of immortality, we are animated with the prospect of re- 
demption from death and the grare." 



132 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



The Gospel of Christ " is the power of God unto salva- 
tion to every one that believeth," by being the means of 
enlightening the mind with the knowledge of God, and 
delivering it from the love of sin and the bondage of ini- 
quity. 

The atonement of Christ, therefore, cannot be properly 
considered as a sacrifice vvhich God required to satisfy the 
claims of his justice, to render him placable, or reconcile 
him to his disobedient children. So far from it, the only 
passage in all the New Testament where the word atone- 
ment occurs, speaks of it as being received, not by God, 
but by man. The truth is, God never required any atone- 
ment on his part to reconcile him to his creatures, for the 
plain reason that he never \vas irreconciled ; and if he had 
been, could never have become reconciled without a change 
taking place in absolute immutahility ! Man was the only 
irreconciled party — the only one needing the atonement ; 
and God, so far from receiving, actually gives the atone- 
ment, or the means of effecting it. For it should be re- 
collected that the word atonement {kaiallage) literally 
signifies reco7iciliation^ and is uniformly so rendered 
throughout the New^ Testament, except in Eomans v : 11, 
where the apostle says, " we also joy in God, through our 
Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now seceived the 
ATONEMENT," (reconciliation.) "For God so loved (was 
not so angry at) the world, that he gave his only begotten 
Son," &:c. " God commendeth his love towards us, in that 
while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." *' Gt)d 
was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, (not 
himself to the world,) not imputing their trespasses unto 
them ; and hath committed unto us the word of reconcilia- 
tion," (atonement.) . 

Here then we discover a scriptural, rational, consistent, 
and philosophical view of the atonement — a view that ex- 
hibits the character of God and of Christ in the most ami- 
able light. Here no flagrant act of cruelty and vengeance, 
inflicted on the innocent to give impunity to the guilty, 
appears, called by the false name of justice, or satisfaction 
to the claims of justice, at which reason is shocked and ail 
the better feelings of the heart revolt. No change or 
alteration takes place in the immutable Jehovah — no other 
fountain of mercy is opened, save that originating in the 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



133 



eternal, unbought and immortal benevolence of God, " who 
hath saved us and called us with an holy calling, not ac- 
cording to our works, but according to his own purpose 
and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the 
world began ; but is now made manifest by the appearing 
of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolishrd death, 
and hath brought life and immortality to light through the 
Gospel." 2 Tim. i : 9, 10. 

The subjects of a wise, powerful and benevolent king, 
revolt from their allegiance, become disaffected and aliena- 
ted in their minds ; and forgetting the character and the 
many acts of kindness they have received from their sove- 
reign, become determined rebels against his government. 
What does the king do to reclaim them? Does he take 
his darling and only son, and publicly execute him, in the 
most cruel manner, in presence of those rebels, and then 
tell them that he has taken ample vengeance on them in 
the sufferings of his darling child, as their substitute and 
proxy— th-iit he has delighted himself in glutting his ven- 
geance, and that the justice of his violated law is fully 
satisfied by his death, and therefore they are pardoned ? 
No ; for this, so far from reclaiming the rebels, would only 
convince them of the cruelty and injustice of the king. — 
True, they might admire the self-devotion, innocence, and 
patient safferirig of the son, but they must shudder at the 
strange barbarity and inhuman cruelty of the father, and 
could have no confidence in the justice of his laws and the 
equity of his government. No ; a very different course is 
pursued by the wise and good king. He sends messen- 
gers of truth and mercy to the alienated rebels, to expos- 
tulate with them for their conduct, convince them of their 
errors and mistakes, to assure them of his equity and be- 
nevolence, of his kind intentions towards them, and soli- 
citude for their welfare, and to persuade them to return to 
their allegiance. They despise and maltreat these mes- 
sengers — he sends others of like character, and they meet 
with a similar reception. At length, to convince them of 
his kindness and benevolent intentions, he sends his only 
son, the perfect image of his own person and character. 
The son flies to the rebels on wings of mercy, with out- 
stretched arms of compassion, he entreats them to return 
to their allegiance and to happiness, assuring them that his 



134 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN* 



father is ready to receive and forgive them — he finds them 
sick, vi^ounded, and dying — he heals the sick, binds up the 
wounded, and saves the dying — he does every thing that 
benevolence can suggest to convince them of his love and 
kindness, which faithfully represents that of his father, the 
king, assuring them, that notwithstanding their rebellion 
and ingratitude, the king is still kind to them, and still fur- 
nishes them with the means of subsistence. But they are 
deaf to all his expostulations and entreaties, and blind to 
every act of kindness he performs ; and at length, with wick- 
ed and malicious hands, they seize and slay him. But still 
bent on fulfilling his message of mercy, the dying prince 
blesses his murderers in death, and sends a petition to his 
father on their behalf, saying, " Father, forgive them, for 
they know not what they do." This last act of the son is 
one of the most powerful and persuasive motives that could 
have been ofiered to the rebels — they are, many of them, 
deeply afi^ected by the scene — conscience upbraids them 
with a sense of their deep guilt and ingratitude — they ex- 
claim " If such be the benevolence and mercy of the son, 
what must be that of the father himself who sent him to 
reclaim us I" Realizing their miserable condition in their 
rebellious state, they cry out in the language of the prodi- 
gal, when he came to himself, " How many hired servants 
of the king have bread enough and to spare, and we perish 
with hunger ; we will arise and go to the king, confess our 
faults, and seek his pardon." And ultimately, all the rebel 
hosts shall be convinced of their folly and wickedness, and 
return to their allegiance and duty. Thus, too, redeemed 
from their ignorance by the instructions and precepts of the 
son, melted into contrition, and cured of their alienation 
in view of the sufl^erings and philanthropy of the innocent 
Jesus, and the exhibitions of the Father's mercy, shall all 
the alienated sons and daughters of the human family, " the 
ransomed of the Lord, return and come to Zion with songs 
and everlasting joy upon their heads ; they shall obtain joy 
and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away." 

Having noticed and given my views of the nature and 
design of the atonement, I shall next proceed, as was pro- 
posed, to consider its extent and efficacy. But lest I weary 
your patience with too long epistles, I shall reserve what 
I have to say on this part of the subject, for a future num- 
ber. Yours, very respectfully. 



LETTER XX. 



The same subject continued. 

Dear Sir— I shall now proceed, as was proposed, Se- 
condly^ To consider your views of the extent and efficacy 
of the atonement. And here I observe that I have no other 
guide or directory to the knovvledge of your views, but 
your Confession of Faith. It is true, your church and 
clergy are now divided into what are called the Old and 
New School, and differ, one class from the other, very 
widely respecting some doctrines, and particularly that of 
the atonement ; some of them zealously maintaining the 
universality of the atonement — that Christ died for all, 
salvation is made possible for all, the Gospel should be 
freely proclaimed to all, and all may come and share its 
blessings if they will. Mr. Beman, of Troy, seems to be 
of this class. And Dr. Ely says, " the greater part of our 
ministers teach that the merit of Christ's sufferings was 
infinitely sufficient^ not only for the salvation of all man- 
kind^ but for millions of worlds of sinners ^ True, the 
Doctor " holds this opinion to be false" and dangerous, and 
%varns his brethren against it, declaring that it " might 
naturally lead the holders of it, either to the doctrine of 
universal salvation, or the denial of the actual redemption 
of God's elect." Dr. Ely is a New School man, and this 
is a New School doctrine which he condemns. Hence, I 
perceive, that your New School men differ as much among 
themselves^ as the Old and New do from each other. But 
to your Confession. 

That asserts, that " they who are elected, being fallen 
in Adam, are redeemed in Christ, are effectually called 
unto faith in Christ by his spirit working in due season ; 
are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power 
through faith, unio salvation. Neither are any other re- 
deemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanc- 
tified, and saved, but the elect only. The rest of mankind 

God was pleased to pass by and to ordain them to 

dishonor and wrath, for their sin, to the praise of his glo- 
rious justice." Confession, chap. iii. § 6, 7. See also the 



136 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



whole chapter. ^' To all those for whom Christ hath pur- 
chased redemption, he doth certahily and effectually apply 
and communicate the same." Chap, viii : § 8. " Others, 
not elected, although they may be called by the ministry 
of the word, and may have some common operations of the 
spirit, yet they never truly come to Christ, and therefore 
cannot be saved ; much less can men, not professing the 
Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, 
be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to 
the light of nature, and the law of that religion they do 
profess ; and to assert and maintain that they may, is very 
pernicious, and to be detested." Chap, x : 4. 

I might proceed to multiply quotations from your Con- 
fession of Faith, of the same import as the above ; but 
what has been quoted is sufficient for my purpose. These 
extracts show that, unless you have renounced your Con- 
fession, you believe Christ died to redeem only ^part, an 
elect and chosen munher, of mankind — that the rest were 
left to perish in hopeless and everlasting ruin — that the 
means of grace or the opportunity of salvation, were and 
ever will be withheld from them — nay more, that, to pre- 
sent the possibility of their being saved, they were " fore- 
ordained to everlasting death," " ordained to dishonor and 
wrath." 

With these things in view, let me ask, dear Sir, is it not 
absurd and nonsensical, nay worse, is it not insult and 
mockery, to pretend that any who are not saved are to 
blame therefor? — to pretend that it is their own fault if 
they do not get to heaven? — that all may get religion and 
be saved if they will ? — or to offer salvation freely to all ? — 
And was not the annunciation of the angel to the shep- 
herds, insult and mockery, when he declared, " I bring you 
good tidings of great joy w^hich shall be to all people"? 
and was not the command of Jesus to his apostles, equal 
insult and mockery, " Go ye into all the world and preach 
the Gospel [good news] to every creature" — knowing as 
he must, on the supposition of the truth of this doctrine, 
that for a large, or the largest portion of mankind, he had 
never tasted death — that no means for their redemption did 
or ever would exist, but that on the contrary the ban of 
everlasting proscription, the decree of endless damnation, 
had from eternity been pronounced against them? How a 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



137 



man of your good sense and native benevolence of heart, 
with such a creed, can mock at the miseries of the repro- 
bate, and insult the misfortunes of the non-elect by any 
such pretences, I am w^hoUy unable to conceive. For it is 
certain, if the creed be true, the proffers of mercy and sal- 
vation to the non-elect, the non-redeemed, are but insult 
and mockery. It were no greater — no, not so great — an 
insult, to pluck out a man's eyes and then tell him to be- 
hold the beauties of the landscape ; or to cut off his legs 
and then ask him to run a race ; or his hands and tell him 
to defend himself. If your Confession of Faith is true, 
and is to be understood according to the most obvious im- 
port of its language, then you know, and I know, and God 
knows, that the reprobate, the non-elect, the non-redeemed, 
can do nothing to save themselves, and neither God, nor 
Christ, nor any other being in the universe will do any 
thing to save them, and consequently their salvation is 
impossi2)le, 

I am inclined to think, however, that like Mr. Beman 
and most of yoar New School men, you preach and profess 
to believe, that Christ died for all men, the plain and posi- 
tive declarations of your Confession to the contrary not- 
withstanding. But how you reconcile your co^ifession and 
^profession, I am v^holly unable to conceive — whether, like 
some of your brethren, you undertake to maintain aunt' 
versal atonement and a partial redemption ; that though 
the sacrificial death of Christ was sufficient, and was actu- 
ally made, for the lohole world, yet it will be efficaciously 
applied only to a part ; or whether a universal atonement 
was made ^Crojndom, and the application of its benefits 
left to depend on contingent circumstances. But you 
doubtless saw clearly and truly, that the preaching of a 
partial atonement and particular election and reprobation 
would make no proselytes, and that you must adopt these 
or similar views, in order to give some color of plausibility 
to your universal calls and invitations to repent, and your 
proffers of mercy and salvation to all who would believe. 
But I must confess I can see no more consistency or har- 
mony in your system by the adoption of either of these 
Tiews, than in the narrow and rigid system of partial atone- 
ment, first noticed. No, Sir, there is|not even as much 
consistency. For if I were going to maintain a partial 

12^ 



138 



LETTERS TO REV. S. 6. AiklMi 



salvation, I would most certainly take the ground of apstr- 
tial atonement, and endeavor to maintain consistent and 
rigid Calvinism throughout. I would say in the language 
of Dr. Ely, " I renounce all vain speculations about a merit 
never to be rewarded, and a sufficiency never to be actually 
applied to the salvation of sinners" — " That obedience 
which was not rendered for a particular individual can ne- 
ver be applicable to his benefit i and whatever Christ has 
ineritedy that shall he receive from the hands of perfect 
justice, even to the salvation of the last sinner, the chastise- 
ment of whose peace he bore. That Jesus by redeeming 
his people has deserved some other honor than that of their 
salvation, I admit; * wherefore God also hath highly ex- 
alted him,' and made him head over all things to the church ; 
but had he merited the pardon of all sinners, by actually 
suffering to the full satisfaction of divine justice for all 
sinners, then all sinners would certainly have been par- 
doned, and the devil himself would have escaped everlast- 
ing punishment." Thus far your brother Ely. See his 
letter to Dr. Willson. 

The Doctor is consistent with himself, so far, at least, as 
his views of atonement and redemption are concerned and 
relate to each other. But the new-fangled Presbyterian 
doctrine of Arminio-Calvinism, conjured up to suit the 
times, has so many short turns and intricate windings, that 
its own most zealous partizans get lost in it mazes, notun- 
frequently fall into the ditch, and pull in with them those 
that they are leading. At least I have never yet found one 
who could reconcile its palpable contradictions and incon- 
sistencies. Perhaps most of them would explain it in a 
similar manner to what a young man of your communion 
did, with whom I conversed on the subject about a year 
since. 

Ascertaining who I was, and what were my sentiments, 
he seemed very solicitous to enter into a discussion of doc- 
trinal points. I was perfectly willing to gratify him. In re- 
turn to a similar question he had proposed to me, I inquired, 

S. You are a Presbyterian, I suppose? 

Presb. Yes. 

S. or course you believe in the Presbyterian Confes- 
sion of Faith ? 
P. Yes. 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



139 



S. That is, you believe that, " by the decree of God, for 
the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are 
predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained 
to everlasting death" — that " these angels and men, thus 
predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and un- 
changeably designed ; and their number is so certain and 
definite that it cannot be either increased or diminished" — 
that " those — 

P. No, no ! I don't believe that, nor any thing like it — * 
I believe Christ died for all — all may believe, repent, come 
to Christ, and be saved, if they will — it is their own fault 
if they don't — God has done all that is necessary, on his 
part, for their salvation. 

S» What ! do you deny your Confession of Faith so 
soon ] 

P, Well, I don't believe in election and reprobation. I 
believe in a full atonement and free salvation. 

S, You believe Christ died for all men without exception? 

P, Yes — yes, he died for all that will believe on him. 

S. Ah ! for all that will believe on him ! And did he die 
for none else ? 

P. No, of course he did not die for those that ivon't 
believe. 

S, Can any be saved for whom he did not die ? 

P. No, " there is none other name," &:c. 

S. Did Christ know from all eternity, who would, and 
who would not believe on him ? 

P. Yes, certainly, he knew all things. 

S, And he died for those that he knew from all eternity 
would believe on him, and for none others? 

P. Yes. 

*S. Well, Sir, will you have the goodness to explain 
these things to me, so that I may understand you ? You 
first say that Christ died for all men without exception — 
next, that he died for all that ivill believe on him and none 
others — that he knew from all eternity who would, and 
who would not believe — that he died for none that he knew 
would not believe ! How, then, did he die for all ? You 
say God has done all that was necessary for salvation on 
liis part — that salvation is free for all — all may be saved if 
they will ; and then you say, none can be saved for whom 
Christ did not die, and he died for those only that he knew 



140 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



would believe. Will you tell me how those canhe saved, 
who, Christ knew from all eternity, would not believe, and 
for whom, consequently, he did not die? 

P. I — — I don't know as I can answer your questions — = 
I have not thought much upon the subject. 

And now, dear Sir, let me ask if you can answer these 
questions— and if so, how ? I very seriously doubt whether 
you will be able to extricate your brother from his difficulty. 
If you can, I shall, and I presume he will, feel greatly 
obliged to you for the favor. But is it not the case with 
many, very many, of these modern Arminio-Calvinists, 
that they " have not thought much upon the suhjecV^ ? 

It is true, as stated in a former letter, I cannot conceive, 
if sin be infinite, and therefore every sin an infinite evil, 
how any one of the human family can ever be saved by 
vicarious suffering or substitution ; as the atonement, even 
when viewed in this light, can be ?io more than one infinite 
employed to remove an infinite number of infinities. But 
at the same time, to be consistent, we must admit that if 
such atonement could save one sinner, it could save all 
sinners for whom Christ suffered. And bating the infinity 
of sin, which perhaps, like Dr. Ely, you have renounced, 
there can be no difficulty, even on your scheme, in saving 
the whole world, if Christ died for all. Dr. Ely says, " I 
admit that sin is not an infinite evil, and that the punish- 
ment of it never was nor will be infinite ; for infinite means 
without any bounds— that which is absolutely infinite can- 
not be increased. Infinity is an attribute of no being but 
God." 

Leaving the foregoing for your serious consideration, I 
shall now proceed to remark, that how much soever you 
and I may differ in our views of the nature and design of 
the atonement — whether we view it as designed to placate 
the divine Being, render him merciful and forgiving, re- 
eoncile him to man, and open a way thereby for the salva- 
tion of sinners ; or whether we view it as an expression 
and commendation of the love of God to men, (Rom. t : 
6-11 ; 2 Cor. v : 14-19 ; 1 John iv : 8-21,) designed to 
reconcile them to God, overcome and destroy the enmity 
and sinful propensities of their hearts, enlighten their un- 
derstandings, and exert an all-pervading and all-powerful 
moral influence in bringing them to God, and to the light 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKTN. 



141 



and enjoyment of his salvation; we doubtless both believe, 
or profess and really think we believe, that great and in- 
calculable benefits result to mankind from the atonement, 
in whatever light it is considered. By you, these benefits 
are confined to a part of mankind ; by me, extended to all. 
And I shall now proceed to prove from the Scriptures, 
1. That these benefits were intended for all mankind with- 
out exception, and, 2. That the object intended shall be 
fully attained, and all mankind blessed with salvation in 
Christ. 

First. St. Paul says, " For the love of Christ constrain- 
eth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, 
then were all dead : and that he died for all, that they 
which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but 
unto him which died for them and rose again." 2 Cor. v : 
14, 15. " For there is one God, and one mediator between 
God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a 
RANSOM FOR ALL, to be testified in due time." 1 Tim. ii : 
5, 6. " That he by the grace of God should taste death 
FOR EVERY MAN." Hob. ii : 9. " And having made peace 
through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all 
things to himself; by him I say, whether things in earth 
or things in heaven." Col. i: 20. St. John says of Christ, 
" He is the propitiation for our sins ; and not for ours only, 
but also for the sins of the whole avorld." 1 Epistle ii : 2. 
How expressions of greater universality than these could 
be found or employed, I am utterly unable to conceive. — 
If the phrases all, all meUy every man, the luhole ivorld^all 
things in earth and heaven, do not express universality, I 
should be at a loss to know what phrases would. And if 
Calvinists who maintain that Christ will save all for whom 
he died, will only preach to the people that Christ will 
save all, all men, every man, all things, the whole ivorld, I 
have no doubt but they would immediately be pronounced 
rank Universalists by all who heard them. 

Secondly. The object intended shall be fully attained, 
and all mankind shall be blessed wath salvation in Christ.' 
To substantiate this position, numerous declarations of 
Scripture may be cited ; but I shall content myself with a 
few only. The prophet Isaiah says, " The pleasure of the 
Lord shall prospefi in his hand. He shall see of the tra- 
vail of his soul and shall be satisfied." Isa. liii : 10, 11. 



142 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



For whom, in his travail, did Christ suffer ? For all men. 
Will he then be satisfied with any thing short of the sal- 
vation of all? No. But he shall he satisfied. What is 
" the pleasure of the Lord" ? " Have I any pleasure at all 
that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God ; and not 
that he should return from his ways and live ? For I have 
no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord 
God; wherefore, turn and live ye." Ezek. xviii : 23, 32. 
" God will have all men to be saved, and come to the know- 
ledge of the truth." 1 Tim. ii : 3, 4. Well, whatever the 
" pleasure of the Lord" is^ it shall prosper in Christ's hand. 
The call is universal to all men. Look unto me, and be 
ye saved, all the ends of the earth." Isa. xlv : 22. And 
this shall prove an effectual call to all, for he says, " As 
the rain cometh down, and the snow, from heaven, and 
returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, &c., so shall 
my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall 
not return unto me void; but it shall accomplish that which 
I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent 
it." Isa. Iv: 10, 11. Again, the Father says, "I shall 
give thee the Heathen for thine inheritance, and the utter- 
most parts of the earth for thy possession." Ps. ii: 8. — 
The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things 
into his hand." And " all that the Father giveth me shall 
come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in nowise 
oast out. For I came down from heaven not to do mine 
own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is 
the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he 
hath given me, I should lose nothing, but should raise it 
up again at the last day." " Thou hast given him power 
over all fiesh, that he should give eternal life to as many 
as thou has given him." John iii : 35, vi : 37-39, xvii : 2. 
" And other sheep I have which are not of this fold : them 
also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice ; and there 
shall be one fold and one shepherd" — " And I give unto 
them eternal life ; and they shall never perish, neither 
shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, 
which gave them me, is greater than all ; and no man is 
able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." John x: 16, 
28, 29. Christ " must reign till he hath put all enemies 
under his feet. Death the last enemy shall be destroyed — 
and when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



143 



the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things 
under him, that God may be all in all." " For as in Adam 
all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." 1 Cor. 
XV : 22-28. For " God hath highly exalted him, and given 
him a name which is above every name : that in the name 
of Jesus every knee should bovi^ in heaven, in earth, and 
under the earth ; and that every tongue should confess 
that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father." 
Phil, ii: 9-11. 

But enough. I stop quoting — not for want of materials, 
but because I have already cited sufficient to establish, as 
I should suppose, beyond all controversy, the position con- 
tended for, viz. that Christ "shall see of the travail of his 
soul and be satisfied" — the universal extent of his reign, 
the entire success of his mission and labors, the complete 
triumph of his principles and religion in bringing the 
atonement (or reconciliation^ which is synonymous with 
it) and consequent salvation to all mankind. To a mind 
untrammelled with prejudice and preconceived opinion, 
and indeed, to all who profess to take the Bible as the man 
of their counsel, I cannot see how this subject can be 
made plainer than it is by the preceding quotations, or 
how any two propositions can be more clearly established 
than these— 1. That Christ died for all, and 2. That he 
will save all he died for. I leave the subject for your seri- 
ous and prayerful consideration, praying that the Lord may 
direct us both into all truth, make us honest and faithful 
in declaring it to our fellow-men, and ever active in obe- 
dience to its holy requisitions. Adieu till I write again. 
Yours, very sincerely. 



LETTER XXI. 



On Presbyterian hifallibility. 

Dear Sm — After having pointed out so many palpable 
inconsistencies and contradictions in the Presbyterian Con- 
fession of Faith, it hardly excites any additional surprise 
in me to observe in that Confession the assumption of vir- 
tual infallihility^ in the most glaring terms^ by your church, 
accompanied also with the modest and v^^ary declaration, 
that " all Synods or Councils since the apostles' times, 
whether general or particular, may err, and many have 
erred ; therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith 
or practice, but to be used as a help in both." Confession 
chap, xxxi : ^ 3. 

The above declaration was, no doubt, very wisely insert- 
ed; as it will naturally tend to allay suspicion with the 
superficial reader, and persuade him of the meekness of 
your sect, and the great modesty of your pretensions ; 
while, at the same time, the assumption of virtual infalli- 
bility, or the poiuer of certainly deciding right, in all cases^ 
by the officers of your church, contained in another chapter 
of your Confession, will, on the other hand, give a pecu- 
liar dignity and grace to all your decisions and excommu- 
nications — a grace and dignity equal, if not superior, to a 
real bull of excommunication from His Holiness, the very 
Pope of Rome. And here, you have altogether the ad- 
vantage of the church of Rome. You enjoy all the privi- 
leges and immunities of infallibility, without the absurd- 
ity, in so man}?- words, of laying claim to it, or the trouble 
and difficulty of defending it. It is perhaps as great a 
privilege to be always in the right, without claiming infal- 
libility, as to be always in the wrong, loith it: and that 
while the church of Rome has a right to maintain that it 
cannot err, yours can, with more modesty and equal truth, 
affirm that it never does. 

It is true, yours is not the only Protestant sect that lays 
claim to this prerogative ; but few of them have, however, 
asserted it in as broad and confident terms as yours. In 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKTN. 



145 



the 30th chapter of your Confession, we have the follow- 
ing declaration : — 

*' The Lord Jesus, as king and head of his church, hath 
therein appointed a government in the hands of church 
officers, distinct from the civil magistrate. To these offi- 
cers the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed^ by- 
virtue whereof they have power to retain and remit sins, 
to shut that kingdom, against the impenitent, both by the 
word and censures ; and to open it unto penitent sinners^ 
by the ministry of the Gospel, and by absolution from cen- 
sures, as occasion shall require." 

If, by the phrase, "kingdom of heaven," in the above 
article, were meant the Presbyterian church, and that only, 
there could be no just ground of complaint, nor could any 
reasonable person charge you or the framers of it with any 
undue assumption of power. But by all Presbyterian 
preachers. whom I have ever heard speak on the subject, 
and all those whose writings I have ever read, the phrase 
is used to designate the kingdom of glory in the spiritual 
and eternal world ; although this is by no means its usual 
acceptation in the New Testament. Understanding, there- 
fore, the phrase, " kingdom of heaven," in the sense usu- 
ally given to it by Presbyterians, i. e. as signifying the 
kingdom of glory in the eternal world, I would seriously 
and respectfully ask, whether the Pope of Rome ever 
claimed any higher authority, or greater power over the 
souls and eternal destinies of men, or virtually any greater 
infallibility in his decisions, than the above extract from 
your Confession allows the officers of your church to be 
invested wi4:h ? 

That your church have claimed the high prerogative of 
deciding not only the eternal destiny of souls in the future 
Avorld, with infallible and unalterable certainty, but also of 
deciding what punishment should be inflicted on the body, 
in time, and have been disposed (contrary to the tenor 
of the first part of the above quotation) to call in the aid 
of the " civil magistrate" to enforce their penalties, is also 
abundantly evident, from the conduct of John Calvin to 
the innocent Michael Servetus ; the persecutions carried 
on against reputed heretics, in England, by Presbyterians, 
in the time of Cromwell ; the hanging of Quakers and 
witches, and the banishing of Baptists, in this country; as 



146 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIITIN. 



also by numerous other equally convincing and demonstra- 
tive evidences that might be named. And even to make 
infallible Papists feel the infallible authority and power of 
Preshyterianism, your pious predecessors enacted lawSy 
justifying and requiring the seizure of Catholic priests 
" without a warrant," forbidding their residence in the 
" land of steady habits," and requiring them to be ban- 
ished, and to suffer death on their return." It is true that 
these civil and corporeal penalties have, from necessity, 
been dispensed with by your church, since the adoption of 
our Constitution and republican form of government. And 
in your present Confession you say, that " God alone is 
Lord of the conscience," and that ecclesiastical " assem- 
blies ought not to possess an}'' civil jurisdiction, nor to in- 
flict any civil penalties." These declarations, however, 
appear (considering what your predecessors did when they 
had the power) to have been made more from necessity 
than choice. And that the officers of the Presbyterian 
church have claimed, and still do claim, to be lords of the 
conscience, the above declaration to the contrary notwith- 
standing, is obvious from the fact, that many virtuous and 
conscientious Christians have been excommunicated from 
their fellowship, and sentenced by them to the pains of 
hell forever" — have been excommunicated, not for those 
offences for which Christ commanded the primitive disci- 
ples to withdraw fellowship from their members, not for 
heinous and scandalous sins, not for immoral conduct, not 
for a disbelief of the Gospel, but because they believed pre- 
cisely what the Gospel asserts, that Jesus Christ is the Son 
of God, (instead of being the God of whom he is the Son,) 
and the Saviour of the world, (instead of being the Sa- 
viour only of an elect number out of the world,) — because 
they believed " the Lord is good to all, and his tender mer- 
cies are over all his works," and that he " will not cast off 
forever." Scores, nay hundreds, of examples may be ad- 
duced, of the most exemplary and pious members of your 
churches being excluded from fellowship, for no other rea- 
son than that they believed in the restitution of all things, 
which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy pro- 
phets since the world began." Acts iii : 21. 

These things clearly show that the officers of your 
church consider themselves infallible judges of truth and 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



147 



^tror, right and wrong, and that too, independently of the 
word of God, and contrary to the fundamental principle of 
Protestantism, that " the Bible, the Bible only, is the creed, 
and contains the religion of Protestants." For those in- 
dividuals excommunicated, stood ready to prove the doc- 
trines they had embraced, hy the Bible, and that alone. — 
But no; this was not good authority — the Confession of 
Faith of ymiT church must be the standard by which to 
try them ; and if they came not up to that human produc- 
tion, though ever so devout, exemplary, and sincere be- 
lievers of the Gospel, they must receive the sentence of 
excommunication, and then be told that those who pro- 
nounce it, have " the keys of the kingdom of heaven, by 
virtue whereof they have power to retain and remit sins, 
to shut that kingdom against the impenitent, and open it 
2into the penitent,^' &c. — virtually telling them they must 
repent of having believed what conscience and the Bible 
tell them is true, before they can have the use of your 
key, by which to open the kingdom of heaven that is now 
:shut against them i 

How these things appear to you and others, I cannot say ; 
but they appear to me as the climax of absurdity, and wor- 
thy only of the darkest ages of Popery, and minds as dark 
with bigotry as they. They are at war with reason and 
Scripture, and directly opposed to other declarations con- 
tained in your Confession* In the " Form of GovernmenV 
of your church, chap, i : " Preliminary Principles,^^ you 
say, " God alone is Lord of the conscience ; and hath left 
it free from the doctrine and commandments of men, whiek 
are in any thing contrary to his word, or beside it in mat- 
ters of faith or worship : therefore they consider the rights 
of private judgment, in all matters that respect religion, as 
universal and unalienable" — " That all church power, 
whether exercised by the body in general, or in the way 
of representation by delegated authority, is only ministe- 
rial and declarative ; that is to say, that the Holy Scrip- 
tures are the only rule of faith and manners, that no church 
judicatory ought te pretend to make laws to bind the con- 
science in virtue of their own authority ; and that all their 
decisions should be founded on the revealed will of God." 
But, Sir,what is "the revealed will of God," on which all de- 
cisions should be founded ? St. Paul says, " God will havo 



]48 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the 
truth." 1 Tim. ii : 4. But the moment any one in your 
church presumes to believe this testimony of inspiration, 
that moment you pronounce him a heretic, and exclude 
him froni the fellowship of your church. Is this founding 
your decisions on the word of God ? Is it not, rather, set- 
ting that at defiance, and establishing a standard separate 
from and in opposition to it? And where, in such pro- 
ceedings, is the evidence that you consider " God alone as 
Lord of the conscience"— that he hath left it free from the 
doctrine and commandments of men— and that " the rights 
of private judgment in all matters that respect religion are 
universal and unalienable"? There is none; and it is 
mockery to pretend that you respect " the rights of private 

•t*tAr>^ryn,a.v^i " nY^^^ ov^-w -.-rr ,* 1 1 ^ v» «• 1r]n o " A» MYl C H 1 On P <i " sVlAVlTfl V\C» 
J L4Cl^ llJC^li 14. X VVlllllJ^^ HXV^ y^^jM-i^y^x-^..^^ ^^^^^^^ 

" left free from the doctrine and commandments of men." 
The officers of your church claim to be the keepers and 
lords of the consciences of all that come within its pale, 
and to decide on the eternal destinies of any of their mem- 
bers who may chance to dissent, not from the Bible, but 
from the doctrine and commandments of men — to decide 
against them, pronouncing them " excluded from the king- 
dom of heaven," with the vain and presumptuous expecta- 
tion that God will sanction their decision, and " bind in 
heaven" what the}'^ have " bound on earth." 

Is it reasonable to conclude, because the Saviour pro- 
mised the divine guidance and sanction to the apostles, in 
all their public ministry in the church, (Matt, xvi : 19, and 
xviii : 18 ; John xx : 23,) that, therefore, the officers of 
your church in this remote age, with so much frailty and 
sinfulness about them, and so many dissentions among 
themselves, have the same infallibility, and can be as sure 
of the sanction of Heaven as the apostles 1 Was not the 
apostolic age, the age of miracles ? Were not the apostles 
inspired and endued with the power of healing the sick, 
casting out demons, &c. 1 And was not the Holy Spirit 
with them, agreeably to the promise of Christ, to lead and 
guide them into all truth, to teach them at all times what 
to say, to bring to their remembrance all things, to assist 
them in all their ministry, and to be with them " always, 
even to the end of the age"? And if they were inspired 
and guided by the Holy Spirit in all things, of course, 



LETTERS TO REV. S, C. AIKIN. 



149 



Heaven approved and sanctioned all they said and did. 
But with the completion of the Scriptures and the age of 
the apostles, ended the days of miracles and of extraordi- 
nary inspiration. Nor was it necessary they should con- 
tinue longer. For the purpose of God, for which they 
were given, was answered ; and in all subsequent ages of 
the church, the infallihle doings of the apostles, being gui- 
ded by the spirit of God, and the infallible rules they have 
left us, of truth, and duty, are sufficient, without frail, sin- 
ful, and uninspired mortals of the present age pretending 
to give infallible decisions of the eternal destinies of their 
fellow-beings, or setting up any other standard of faith, 
aside from the Gospel of Jesus Christ, 

In conclusion, permit me to say, Rev. Sir, that until the 
present unhappy difficulties and divisions in your church, 
both about doctrines and practices, be healed, and its offi- 
cers and Doctors of Divinity be agreed among themselves, 
what, on the one hand is truth and duty, and on the other 
hand, error and sin, it will appear much more modest and 
becoming to discard all pretensions to infallibility, either 
in doctrine or practice. It will be indicative of much more 
meekness and humility, and 'even more of the Christian 
temper, to allow that high Heaven alone can rightly judge 
of the hearts, and determine the eternal destinies of men — 
and that since the days of inspiration and miracles have 
eeased, there may be so much infirmity and indiscretion 
and wickedness of man," in establishing other confessions 
of faith, and other rules for trying heretics, than those laid 
down in the Bible, "as to render the general evils which 
flow from this infirmity, indiscretion and wickedness of 
man, greater than the local and temporary advantages" re- 
sulting from the excommunication of heretics. 
Very respectfully yours. 



13* 



LETTER XXII. 



On Universal Salvation. 

Deak Sir- — I shall now call your attention to the doc- 
trine of impartial grace, and the final holiness and happi- 
ness of all mankind. Having passed in review the most 
prominent features of Presbyterianism, and shown, as I con- 
ceive, its most distinguishing doctrines to be without foun- 
dation in Scripture, reason, and the nature of things, I trust 
you will bear with me a little longer, while I present you 
with some considerations, which I conceive to be of great 
importance, relative to that doctrine which has long been 
unpopular in the world, and every where spoken against," 
but which I firmly believe to be the truth of God, and of 
which I am known to be the public and uniform advocate. 

The subject must be allowed to be one of the most deeply 
interesting and important subjects that ever engrossed the 
attention of man. The doctrine, whether true or false, 
cannot be deemed beneath your notice, or the notice of any 
reasonable and philanthropic mind. For what subject, 
dear Sir, let me ask, can possess a more deeply thrilling 
interest, or be of more solemn and affecting moment, than 
that relating to the character of the great Jehovah, and the 
final and eternal destiny of countless millions of his sen- 
tient offspring I 

It is not my design to enter largely into the exhibition, 
or discussion, or defence of Universalism at this time, for 
the following reasons : There are now so many publica- 
tions, sermons, essays, treatises, &:c.,. before the public, and 
within your reach, that treat the subject more at large and 
in all its various ramifications, that the labor seems unne- 
cessary. I have already introduced some of its leading 
features and arguments in a former letter, while treating 
on the doctrine of endless misery — and I have neither time 
nor room to be diffuse here. I shall therefore confine my- 
self to a few important particulars, tending to show the 
claims of this doctrine to a more serious and favorable 
consideration, than I have reason to believe you have yet 
given it. 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. ISl 

It is to me one of the most surprising and unaccounta- 
ble things in the world, that a doctrine so benevolent in its 
nature, so sublime in its details, so expansive in its chari- 
ties, so cheering in its prospects, so completely adapted to 
th^ moral wants of mankind, so holy in its precepts, and 
so salutary in its influence upon the heart, — should be 
viewed with such abhorrence and dread, much more that 
it should be viewed and treated with such hatred, animo- 
sity and spite, by many people in this country — yea, by 
many religionists too, who profess to be both philanthropic 
and pious. I know of but one parallel case in all the his- 
tory of our race — it is the fact that our blessed Master 
received similar treatment from the religionists of his age. 
He who went about doing good," preaching "peace on 
earth and good will to men," healing the sick and comfort- 
ing the afflicted, was viewed with jealousy and hatred, and 
accused by the religionists of that age, of being a disturber 
of the public peac€, a great sinner, and an enemy of reli- 
gion. He who cast out devils was accused of being pos- 
sessed of a devil — he who came to save the world, was 
crucified by that world. , So, Universalism, which teaches 
the boundless benevolence of God, and calls on men to 
love him with all the heart for the great love wherewith he 
hath loved them, and to love and do good to all men as they 
have opportunity, because all men are brethren, children 
of the same all-benignant Parent, is charged with being 
an enemy to true piety and godliness. The doctrine which 
teaches the final end of sin, and the universal prevalence 
of holiness, is accused of encouraging sin and promoting 
iniquity. That system which teaches the salvation of the 
whole world through Jesus Christ, is charged with having 
originated with the devil, who is said to seek the damna- 
tion of the whole world! I must think and say of such 
opposing characters now, as Jesus did of those in his day — 

they know not what they do." But leaving this point, 
I will now proceed to the considerations proposed. 

1. Universalism is the only doctrine that harmonizes 
with the attributes which all denominations allow God to 
possess. It is allowed on all hands, that God is i7ifi7iit€ly 
toise^ powerful, and benevolent. If so, his wisdoin cannot 
err respecting either the end or the means — He can be 
ignorant of no event that ever has or ever shall transpire — 



162 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



with him there can be no casualty, doubt, nor uncertainty — 
nor can there be any failure in the accomplishment of all 
or any of his plans or purposes ; because, knowing the 
means necessary to accomplish them, he must know 
whether they were adapted to, and would attain the end 
designed. His power being omnipotent, can never be either 
defeated or successfully opposed. He speaks, and it is 
done — he commands, and it stands fast — he doeth all his 
pleasure in the armies of heaven and among the inhabi- 
tants of the earth — none can stay his hand. His benevo- 
lence extends to all, and seeks the happiness of all. If 
there be one being in existence to whom his love or good- 
ness does not extend, then it is limited, consequently is not 
infinite. But the voice of revelation expressly declares, 
" the Lord is good to all.^^ What, then, let me ask, shall 
prevent the ultimate happiness of all mankind? If it do 
not take place, it must be either because God cannot save 
all, or because he will not. If you say, 1. that he cannot 
save all, you deny the infinity of his power, and at once 
make him an impotent and dependent being. If you say, 
2. that he will nx)t, you deny his goodmess and make him 
even worse than men ; for all good men say they ivould 
save all if they could, and they are doing all they can to 
effect the salvation of their fellow-beings. There is, there- 
fore, no other alternative but to say, 3, that he can save all, 
and will save all ; or el^se turn around and deny one or 
more of the fundamental attributes of God. And this last 
is virtually done by every system of Limitarianism ever 
preached in the world. 

If any being suffer endless misery, God must have fore- 
ordained it, and consequenily been governed by infinite 
hatred toward that individual ; or he must have foreknown 
it, and this would make him just as bad ; for he could have 
had no other end in view in his creation than that which 
he knew would be the result, viz. misery. If you say the 
agency of the creature has led him to endless misery, I 
ask, did not God know this when he created him ? If he 
did not, he was very ignorant, and besides, he created him 
at an infinite risk. If he did, then for what purpose did 
he create him hut for misery] Perhaps you may here say 
I have forgotten one attribute of God, viz. his justice. No, 
Sir, I have not forgotten it. Nor have I forgotten that 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIK. 



153 



God is one, and his name one. God is love'' and he can 
have no attribute opposed to his nature. God is good, and 
can have no attribute opposed to his goodness. He can- 
not be divided against himself. His justice and goodness 
are not opposing principles. None will deny that good- 
ness seeks the happiness of its objects ; none can deny 
that endless misery would be opposed to the happiness of 
its subjects. Justice, therefore, which is but a modifica- 
tion of goodness itself, cannot require the endless misery 
of man. Justice can never require the infliction of an 
unmerciful punishment ; nor can goodness withhold the 
infliction of a just punishment. Justice and judgment are 
the habitation of God's throne ; mercy and truth go before 
his face. Mercy and justice in God, are no more opposed 
to paf»h ntViPr t[i«ir» c\\^v\\\t and finuit.v a mono* nripn — or pa- 

WW-^** ^V.^^^^ ^.^^^^^j ^ ^ .1. 

rental affection and salutary government in families.— 
" Whom the Lord loveth, he chasteneth," &:c. All are 
partakers of his chastening, therefore he loveth all. But 
he will not always chide, neither will he keep his anger 
forever. He doth not afflict willingly, nor grieve the chil- 
dren of men, but chastens them for their profit, that they 
may be partakers of his holiness. O, how lovely and ami- 
able does the justice of God appear, when viewed in har- 
mony with his love and goodness. Universalism is the 
only doctrine that can harmonize with these and all other 
divine attributes. 

2. Universalism is the only doctrine that harmonizes 
with the declared objects of the mission of Christ. What 
was the object of Christ's mission % — for what purpose did 
he come into the world ? — for what object did he labor, 
preach, work miracles, suffer, bleed, die, rise, and ascend? 
Was it that he might save a few souls from the general 
wreck of human nature? Was it that he might save a 
'part of the world, and by his labors and miracles enhance 
the m^isery of the other part to all eternity? The word of 
God nowhere declares him to be the Saviour of a "part of 
the world; nor does it declare him to be a part oj a Sa- 
viour to the world ; but it unequivocally declares that 
" God sent him to be the Saviour of the loorld.'^' And 
they that were with and saw him, declare, " we know that 
this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world,'' Now% 
Sir, let me ask, can Christ be the Saviour of the world, if 



154 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



the world is never saved 1 Christ says, " Lo I come (it is 
written of me in the volume of the book) to do thy will, 
O God." God " will have all men to be saved, and to come 
unto the knowledge of the truth." "I came down from 
heaven," says Jesus, not to do mine own will, but to do 
the will of him that sent me : and this is the Father's will 
which hath sent me, that of all he hath given me, (and the 
Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his 
hand,) I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the 
last day." 

The Heathen are given to Christ for his inheritance, and 
the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession : and he 
says, all that the Father giveth me shall come to me, and 
him that cometh to me I will in nowise cast out." Again, 
he says, he came to " seek and save that which was lost.'' 
How many were lost? Answer: all — all had sinned and 
come short of the glory of God — all had gone out of the 
way — there was none that did good, no not one. Will he 
succeed in saving that which was lost? Will he accom- 
plish the work which he came to do ? "I have finished 
the work (he says) which thou gavest me to do." " As 
by the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to con- 
demnation, even so by the righteousness of one, the free 
gift came upon all men unto justification of life." For by 
the grace of God, Jesus tasted death for every man, and 
gave himself a ransom for all to be testified in due time. 
And we are expressly assured, that " he shall see of the 
travail of his soul and be satisfied," and " the pleasure of the 
Lord shall prosper in his hand." ''God sent not his Son 
into the world to condemn the world, but that the world 
through him might be saved." Now, what is the obvious 
import of all these and numerous other similar passages? 
Can they be explained in consistency with the doctrine of 
a limited salvation ? Will any thing short of the salvation 
of all men answer the end designed by the advent of Christ ? 
Was not the design and provision as extensive as the hu- 
man family — as ample as the wants of a perishing world? 
And will the end be defeated, or the purpose given up, or 
he, to whom all power in heaven and earth was given, be 
foiled by a subtle and mightier foe 1 

Suppose, Sir, a neighboring farmer, has a flock of sheep, 
eonsistingof one hundred, which hare all gone astray and 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



155 



got lost in the wilderness — he calls his servant and says, 
" My servant, I have chosen thee as the most faithful of 
all my household, my soul delighteth in thee, in thee I re- 
pose confidence, I will uphold thee, and my spirit shall go 
with thee, — my flock has wandered from me, they are all 
lost ; go, search till you find them, and when you have 
found them, bring them back with joy to my fold ; for it 
is not my will that any of them should perish, but that all 
should be brought back to one fold, with one faithful shep- 
herd at their head." The servant starts on his mission, he 
finds the sheep in the wilderness, all wild and undomesti- 
cated, some lost in deep ravines, and others wandering on 
the bleak mountains — he collects twenty-five out of the 
hundred, together, and returns to his master, saying, " I 
have finished the work which thou gavest me to do, I have 
found and saved your lost flock, and of all concerning 
which you gave me charge, I have lost none — behold here 
I am, with the sheep of your pasture." The master looks, 
and instead of seeing the flock of an hundred sheep^ sees 
only one-fourth part of the flock ! Think you, dear Sir, 
that he would be satisfied with the labors of his servant, 
or acknowledge his statement true, that he had lost none ? 
Would he not rather upbraid him with unfaithfulness and 
falsehood, and say, I charged you to bring back rny flock^ 
the hundred sheep, and here you have only brought fourth 
part of the flock, and now falsely insinuate that this is the 
flock, while the majority of the flock are still in the wil- 
derness, perishing with hunger, and exposed to the devour- 
ing wolves and voracious tigers !" What could the servant 
reply? Would he say, "I supposed when you said an 
hundred, you only meant twenty-five, and w^hen you said 
all, you only meant a small part /" Or would he say, " it 
was not my fault, but that of the sheep, that they did not 
come — I called, but they would not follow me — I approach- 
ed, but they fled from me." And would not the master 
answer such excuses by saying, " Thou unfaithful, slothful 
and wicked servant, by thine own words thou art con- 
demned ; for instead of using thine eflforts to save them 
that were alienated and lost, thou hast only brought back 
those that were the least liable to destruction — those that 
voluntarily came back, without one eflfort of thine — but those 
which most needed thy labors, thou hast left to perish — 



156 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



those that were the most alienated, and knew not thy 
voice, were those on which thy principal labors should 
have been bestowed — they are of too much value to be 
lost — thy faithfulness and perseverance might have over- 
come their timidity, given them confidence in thy friendly 
intentions, and induced them at last to follow thee home in 
peace — thou hast abused my trust, disappointed my expect- 
ations, and through thy neglect my sheep are mostly lost." 

The application of the above you will readily under- 
stand. And now, Sir, unless Universalism be true, one 
of two things must follow — either, 1, the object of Christ's 
mission is falsely stated in the Bible ; or, 2, that object will 
never be attained. For it is clear that Universalism is the 
only doctrine that harmonizes with the declared object of 
Christ's mission. 

But lest I exceed the limits I had prescribed myself in 
this letter, I shall defer what more I have to say on this 
subject till a future number. 

Yours, &:c. 



LETTER XXIII. 

The same subject continued. 

Dear Sir — I again resume the consideration of Uni- 
versalism, and here beg leave to remark, 

3. That this doctrine alone accords with the best feel- 
ings and holiest affections and aspirations of the hmnoM 
heart. There is not a man on earth possessed of the 
feelings of humanit}^ or that can justly boast of one par- 
ticle of philanthropy, but what fervently desires the salva- 
tion of all men. The love of happiness is connatural 
with the existence of man ; and every good mind seeks 
not only his own happiness, but the well-being of all his 
fellow-creatures. No benevolent mind can delight in the 
misery of its fellow-being, either for time or eternity, any 
more than it could delight in its own m.isery. And I 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



157 



think, dear Sir, from the good opinion I have of you, that 
I hazard nothing in raying, your prayers, whatever maybe 
your theory, are on the side of Universalism. You can- 
not but desire the reformation, and pray for the final holi- 
ness and happiness of all your fellow-beings. You can- 
not but pray that your own doctrine of eternal misery may 
prove false — you cannot pray for its truth — you cannot 
pray in accordance with your creed. 

Let us here suppose a being, so lost to every benevolent 
feeling, as to pray according to the faith set forth in your 
Confession — how must he pray? Something like the fol- 
lowing. " O Lord, my God, thou Father of the spirits of 
all flesh, I thank thee that thou hast created an eternal 
hell, and that thou hast, from all eternity, foreordained 
millions and millions of my fellow-beings, equally as good, 
or better, by their practice, than myself, to experience its 
hottest pains, world without end ! I pray that they may 
feel thy keenest ire and hottest indignation forever. I pray 
that thine eternal and omnipotent wrath may be poured 
out, without mixture, upon them — that they may never 
know what happiness is, but its dreadful contrast — that 
beneath the liquid billows of hell's molten sea their tor- 
ments may be ever increasing and never ceasing — that 
instead of being reclaimed from sin, their iniquities may 
be eternally perpetuated, and their rebellion against thee 
never end — that instead of their ever being restored to holi- 
ness, and employed in singing hallelujahs to thy praise, they 
maybe fixed in a state of unending impurity and transgres- 
sion, and blaspheme thy holy name world without end — 
that" — but I stop — I can proceed no farther with such 
a prayer — it is too horrid — it approaches almost to blasphe- 
my. It is such a prayer as no 7nan can ofTer to the infinite 
Majeaty of heaven. No being in the universe can pray thus, 
unless it be a malignant and infernal spirit, if such spirits 
there be. But, Sir, if the doctrine of endless misery be true, 
why not pray thus ? Why not pray that such dreadful 
decrees may be carried into effect ? Is it more wicked for 
you to pray for the accomplishment of such decrees, than 
it is for God to ordain them % Ah ! Sir, there is too much 
benevolence in your heart — there is too much even of holi- 
ness there, to allow you thus to pray. You cannot be as 
bad, if you try, as your doctrine makes out your God to be. 

14 



loS 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIK. 



But, Sir, whence springs this abhorrence of misery— 
whence this love of happiness, this desire to extend it to 
all I Springs it from an evil fountain, or a good ? Comes 
it to render keener our misery, or to be the precursor of 
our enjoyment ? We see provision made in the natural 
world for satisfying all the natural desires of all the infe- 
rior animals, and of man. We see the beast, the bird, the 
fish, and even the worm, provided with all necessary means 
of satisfying their desires, and of being happy, according 
to their several capacities for enjoyment. We see man pro- 
vided with every thing necessary to satisfy his natural de- 
sires (leaving out, of course, his artificial and adscititious 
desires) in temporal things. But moin has spiritual de- 
sires — desires that look beyond this world. All men de- 
sire immortal and endless happiness in the future state of 
existence. Whence arises this desire ? It is implanted 
by the hand of nature, or nature's God. And is here an 
exception to the general order of nature ? Has God made 
provision for satisfying all the naUrral desires of his crea- 
tures, and none, or but inadequate provision for supplying 
the spiritual wants of his children ? Is this the only desire 
that is to remain forever unsatisfied ? 

But to say nothing of this universal desire of happiness 
in all men in relation to themselves, I wish to urge upon 
your notice the prayers of all good men, in all ages of the 
world. It is the first prayer from the opening lips X)f the 
new born child of grace — and the last supplication breathed 
forth from the dying saint — that God would have mercy 
upon sinners, reclaim them from their wanderings, and 
make them participants of his salvation — that the Saviour 
may go on, conquering and to conquer, till the last rebel 
submits to his mild sceptre — till all shall know him from 
the least to the greatest — till every knee shall humbly bow, 
and every tongue confess him Lord to the glory of God 
the Father — till sin shall be finished, an end made of trans- 
gression, everlasting righteousness be brought in, and 
universal holiness and happiness prevail. Such are the 
desires and prayers of all Christians and saints in all ages — 
and they all rejoice at the conversion of every sinner from 
the error of his ways, to the knowledge and obedience of 
the truth. Yea ; the very angels in heaven rejoice at such 
an event ; for " there is joy in heaven over one sinner that 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



159 



tepenteth." I ask, then, will the joy of heaven ever be 
full and complete, while one sinner remains excluded from 
God's mercy, when his conversion would give an accession 
of joy to the abodes of the blessed? And, I ask again, 
from whence spring these philanthropic desires, and who 
inspires the hearts of Christians to pray for the universal 
prevalence of holiness and happiness? Do they not spring 
from God— does not he inspire such prayers ? The an- 
sw^er must be, yes. Well, can the stream rise higher than 
the fountain ? — can the receiver be greater than the giver? — 
can the drop be greater than the ocean ? — or the spark 
greater than the flame ? Will God inspire his creatures 
with more benevolence than he possesses himself? Or 
with prayers in opposition to his own will ? Or will he 
impart to them desires which he determines never to fulfil ? 
Impossible, God will answer the prayers of the righte- 
ous — he will fulfil their desires. We are expressly com- 
manded to pray for all men ; and the reason assigned is, 
God wills the salvation of all. We are also commanded 
to pray in faith, nothing wavering, to lift up holy hands 
without wrath and doubting. 

Thus, Sir, you see that the doctrine of universal salva- 
tion, and that alone, accords with the best affections and 
holiest aspirations of the human heart, and particularly 
with the prayers of all true Christians ; while no one can 
pray for an opposite doctrine to-be true. 

4. The doctrine of universal salvation is the most fa- 
vorahle to true and genuine devotion^ and the most salutary 
in its moral and practical infiueiice upon the heart and 
life. No doctrine that was ever yet preached in the \vorld, 
can possibly lay its believers and advocates under so strong 
and solemn obligations of love, gratitude and obedience to 
God, as this ; or enjoin so forcibly the duties of benevo- 
lence and charity among men ; and surely none can ren- 
der the contemplation and service of God so cheering and 
dear to the feeling heart. The doctrine is the doctrine of 
love, and our services are the services of love ; not the 
cold, morose and formal piety of the bigot, the furious 
ebullitions of the fanatic, the heartless fawning of the syco- 
phant, nor the cringing servility of the slave ; but the free, 
cheerful and voluntary aspirations of gratitude and affec- 
tion. We view God as the universal Father, Friend, and 



160 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



Saviour of his children — whose wisdom comprehends all 
things, and whose designs can never be defeated ; whose 
power, though omnipotent, is not the terror, but the safety 
and defence of his children ; and whose benevolence be- 
stow^s, and ever will besiow, more good upon us than the 
utmost stretch of our desires could possibly seek or ask at 
his hand. We feel to adore him for all his adorable per- 
fections, to love him for his great love wherewith be hath 
loved us, to obey him because his commands are not griev- 
ous, but easy, and in keeping them there is peace and great 
reward. We look upon all mankind as brethren, created 
and blessed by the same almighty Benefactor and Father, 
and feel bound to do good to all as we have opportunity. 
If we love God we shall love our brother also. And as 
God so loved us, w^e ought also to love one another. If we 
see our fellow-men going astray, we are assured that " the 
goodness of God leadeth to repentance," and we urge them 
back to duty and virtue by every tender and affecting consi- 
deration — by every tie of gratitude and love that can touch 
the heart, or recal them to virtue and duty. And we believe 
such motives far more powerful and effectual in reclaiming 
sinners than all the terrors of a burning hell, and all the 
wrath of an offended Deity. For w^e know that the love of 
Christ constraineth to obedience. When draw^n by the cords 
of love and the bands of a man., they w^ill run after him. 

I know, indeed, that there are some who call themselves 
Universalists, who come very far short of living up to the 
requirements of this glorious doctrine, who at heart are 
strangers to its principles, and have nothing of it but the 
name. This, however, is the case, more or less, with all 
denominations ; and therefore cannot be urged as an ob- 
jection against the doctrine of Universalism : for none 
(who know what Universalism is) can deny that, if Uni- 
versalists live up to their principles, and obey the require- 
ments of their doctrine, they must be good men. We 
doubtless all come far short of duty — but, for one, I nei- 
ther desire myself, nor have any wish that others should 
be any better dian Universalism requires and strictly en- 
joins—!, e. to love God with all the heart and mind, and 
all mankind as ourselves. I will now close what I have 
to say under this head, in the beautiful language of Dr, 
T. Southwood Smith, of England :— 



LETTERS TO REV. S, C, AIKIN, 



161 



The cheering and benevolent tendency of a belief in 
the ultimate happiness =of all intelligent beings ought, at 
least, to entitle it to attention. He who believes that the 
whole system of things is under the wisest and best di- 
rection, has a source of consolation which must be entirely 
unknown to himv, whose system leads him to suspect that 
the wisdom and benevolence of its author are limited and 
partial. Embracing the faith of the first, when true to my 
principles, I can contemplate the present with complacency, 
and anticipate the future with delight- I can look upon 
adversity with resignation, upon prosperity with a calm 
and chastened joy. I can smile even in those moments 
when neither philosophy nor religion can check the start- 
ing tear. I see, it is true, that man is born to trouble, that 
his days are few and evil, that impurity stains him, that 
passions blind him, that evil of every kind assails him, and 
that the iniquities of many individuals will incur a long 
and protracted period of suffering ; but I see too, a princi- 
ple at work which must finally destroy it. I see the hand 
of the Deity arranging every event with exquisite skill and 
unbounded benignity. I see the prospects brighten as the 
wheels of time revolve, developing gradually the stupen- 
dous scheme, and manifesting at every movement new indi- 
cations of wisdom, and new demonstrations of love, I see 
at the helm of affairs, an intelligence that cannot err, a 
watchfulness that cannot tire, a benignity which cannot be 
unkind, and a power which cannot be frustrated. I see at 
the head of his large family, a Father, whose equal love 
is extended to every individual, who is laboring to promote 
the happiness of each alike, according to the measure of 
capacity he has given, and who will not labor in vain. 
Though clouds and darkness are around about him, I am 
satisfied that righteousness and judgment are the habita- 
tion of his throne. I therefore bow with resignation, 
where I cannot exult with joy, and glow with hope, even 
when nearest to despair." 

5. TJyiiversalism needs only to he known and understood 
to he emhraced and loved hy every enlightened^ benevolent^ 
and ingenuous mind. It is a fact, which I look upon as 
of no little importance in its favor, that till within a very 
few years, almost all the believers and advocates of Uni- 
versalism in this country, were once believers in the popular 

14 # 



162 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AiKIN; 



doctrine of endless misery ; and who in despite of early 
prejudice, the influence of tradition, the entreaties of 
friends, and sometimes great pecuniary sacrifices and the 
loss of their standing in churches and society — and many 
times with no other information on the subject than what 
they obtained by a prayerful perusal of the Bible, felt them- 
selves constrained to come out and avow their belief in the 
doctrine of the final restitution. Many of them had been 
among the brightest ornaments of Orthodox churches, and 
nothing but a sense of imperious duty, and a conscientious 
regard for the honor of God and the happiness of man, 
could have induced them to make the sacrifices that were 
required of them for avowing their belief in Universalism. 
It is true, that at this day, there are many who are brought 
up in Universalist families, and early taught this sublime 
and glorious doctrine from the lips of the parents. But 
still, multitudes who were trained up in the belief of all 
the dogmas of your creed, are continually coming over to 
the side of universal benevolence, and avovv^ing their be- 
lief in the truth of this sentiment. This argues much in 
its favor, especially when viewed in connexion with ano- 
ther fact, viz. that no pains are spared by your preachers 
and members generally, to make the doctrine appear odi- 
ous, abhorrent and dangerous, to imbue the minds of all 
youth with the bitterest prejudice against it, and, if possi- 
ble, to prevent all from hearing it preached by its own ad- 
vocates : while on the other hand, Universalists are per- 
fectly willing that all their adherents and youth should hear 
Presbyterians preach, even when they preach against Uni- 
versalism- — we tell them to hear all sides, and then judge 
which is right — to " prove all things, and hold fast that 
which is good" — we have no fears as to the result. For 
we are sure that an ingenuous and candid mind, when 
thoroughly acquainted with both systems, cannot be long 
in determining which doctrine is the most beautiful, rea- 
sonable, scriptural, and the most honorable to God and salu- 
tary for man. Most of the members of your communion 
are astonishingly ignorant of the doctrine that we hold and 
preach, and there seems to be a great desire among your 
preachers that they should remain ignorant of it. But 
why this desire to keep them ignorant ? Can information 
on the subject injure them? If the doctrine be false and 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



163 



absurd, they will find it out by hearing it, and thereby be 
enabled to expose and refute its errors and absurdities. 
But ignorance is but a poor excuse for their being incom- 
petent to do it. The truth is, however, — and your preach- 
ers are aware of it — that the more Universalism is known 
the more it is believed ; the better and more generally it is 
understood, the more advocates it will gain. And the time 
is rapidly approaching when, notwithstanding every exer- 
tion to the contrary, it ivill be known and generally believed. 

6. Unimrsalism counts among its advocates many of the 
most amiable and learned men^ in almost all ages of the 
Christian churchy that have ever adorned her ranks or dona 
honor to human nature, I notice this particular, not by 
way of boasting, nor as an argument calculated to prove 
the doctrine true, but because it is often said by uninform- 
ed individuals, who probably know no better, that Univer- 
salism is a 7mD doctrine, that has never been heard of till 
very recently, and has never been advocated by any except 
a few obscure and graceless individuals without any just 
pretensions to learning or piety ; and because I think that 
yourself, as well as most of my readers, may be interested 
in reading what I have to say on this head. 

Among the many eminent men, in ancient and modern 
times, who have advocated the doctrine of the final resti- 
tution of all things, I have room to mention comparatively 
but few. The following must suffice for my present pur- 
pose : — 

Clemens Alexandrinus, the celebrated and learned Ori- 
gen, Gregory Thaumaturgus, Pamphilius, Eusebius, Titus, 
Bishop of Bostra, Basil the Great of Cappadocia, Gregory 
Nazianzen, Didymus of Alexandria, Jerome, Evagrius 
Ponticus, John of Jerusalem, Domitian, Theodorus, Non- 
nus, Leontius, and many others of the early Christian Fa- 
thers and Bishops, before the general prevalence of Popery. 
And subsequently to the Reformation, Dr. Thomas Burnet, 
Rev. J. Brandon, Paul J. Bitaube, Henry Brooke, Dr. Tho- 
mas Brnughton, Rev. John Brown, Dr. David Hartley, 
Dr. Thomas Belsham, Dr. George Cheyne, Dr. Samuel 
Clarke, Dr. Thomas Cogan, Dr. Lant Carpenter, John Le 
Clerc, Dr. Samuel Huber, De La Cheverette, Dumoulin, 
L'Archer, Durant, Eberhard, Chevalier Ramsay, William 
Law, William Duncomb, Archbishop Tillotson, Sir George 



164 



LETTERS TO REV, S. C. AIKIN. 



Stonehouse, Bishop Newton, John Henderson, Dr. Joseph 
Priestley, Dr. Henry More, Dr. Redman, Soame Jenyns, 
the German Steinbart, Damm, Fuller, Fisher, Dr. De Een- 
neville, Petersen, Pettitpierre, William Whiston, Rev. 
Robert Robinson, Rev. Rochemont Barbauld, Mrs. Ann 
Letilia Barbauld, Dr. John Jebb, Nathaniel Scarlett, Mr. 
Creighton, Mr. Cue, Lord President Duncan Forbes, Bish- 
op George Rust, Archdeacon Paley, Dr. T. Southwood 
Smith, Editors of Analytical Review, Monthly and Criti- 
cal Reviews, Dr. Jonathan Mayhew, Elhanan Winchester, 
Dr. Charles Chauncey, Dr. Benjamin Rush, and hundreds 
of other distinguished, amiable, eminent philosophers, di- 
vines and literati in England, and other countries of Europe 
and America, 

The sanction which these names give to the doctrine, 
though I do not conceive they establish its truth, will yet 
tend to diminish the reproach which some ignorant oppo- 
nents have attempted to heap on it, and, when it shall be 
generally known that they were its advocates, may serve to 
check that contemptuous manner in which some are accus- 
tomed to speak, both of the doctrine and all its advocates. 
It will at least show, 1st, that the doctrine is not new in 
this age, and 2d, that eminent learning, talents and piety 
have abetted its claims to divine authority. 

I have now finished what I designed to say to you on 
the doctrine of universal salvation, except some incidental 
remarks which I shall reserve till my concluding letter. 
What I have written, I have written with candor and sin- 
cerity, and hope it will receive a candid perusal at your 
hands. One more letter I design shall close the series. 
Yours, very respectfully. 



LETTER XXIV. 



Concluding Epistle, 

Dear Sir — In bringing this long series of letters to a 
close, I cannot take my leave of you, without once mord 
calling your attention to a candid and serious review of 
your w^hole system of theory and practice, together v/ith 
their obvious tendency — I mean, so far as the peculiarities 
of Presbyterianism are concerned — to see whether you 
have not, from some cause or other, either from the power 
of tradition, or prejudice, or early associations, or the sanc- 
tion of great names, or self-interest and the love of popu- 
larity, too hastily adopted 3^our opinions, and subscribed to 
principles and doctrines w^ithout any foundation in reason 
or revelation, taking for granted those very premises that 
required the most substantial proof. Is it not. Sir, more 
than probable that, from some one or more of ihe above 
causes, you were led to subscribe to the fundamental doc- 
trines of your creed, before you had ever thoroughly ex- 
amined the subject for yourself, or allowed yourself time 
to reflect that there was at least a possibility of their being 
untrue, and even pernicious ? 

Can it be possible. Sir,- that a man of your natural good 
sense and strong powers of mind, saw, or thought you saw, 
sufficient evidence in the word of God to convince you of 
the popular doctrine of the fall — that by eating an apple 
Adam lost forever the image and favor of his Maker, be- 
came totally changed and "corrupted in all the faculties 
and parts of soul and body," was transformed from an im- 
mortal to a mortal being, and conveyed the taint of natural 
and moral death, through all his unborn posterity for six 
thousand years past, and as many thousand years to come, 
if the world shall continue so long? Can it be that you 
found evidence to convince you of the doctrine of total 
depravity — that all the posterity of Adam, in consequence 
of the original corruption of their nature, through his act, 
without their agency, consent or knowledge, became " ut- 
terly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good 
and wholly inclined to all evil^ and that continually^^— i]i^X 



166 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN 



eve-ry act and volition of man, in a state of nature, is sin- 
ful in the sight of God, however well intended by the crea- 
ture — that all that men call social and benevolent affections 
and virtuous feelings and actions, are infinitely criminal 
in the eye of Heaven, and justly deserving of "all the 
miseries of this life, death itself, and the pains of hell for- 
ever" ? Did you learn from the Bible the doctrine of elec- 
tion and reprobation — that God did, from all eternity, elect 
some men and angels to everlasting life, and predestinate 
others to everlasting death, without any foresight of faith 
or good works on the part of the elect, 

Predeslinatin? some, without pretence 
To lieaven ; and some to hell for no offence 

that their number was so certain and definite that it could 
not be either increased or diminished — that God called on 
all men, not excepting the reprobate, as free agents, to yield 
obedience to his holy ]aw, though he well knew they were 

utterly indisposed^ disabled^ and made opposite to all 
good,^^ &c., and that he himself had from all eternity " un- 
(i\\WL\gQ^i!^\^ foreordained ivhatsoever comes to vass,'^ not only 
with regard to all their actions in time, but their endless 
destiny in eternity ? Was it from the Bible you learned 
the tremendous doctrine of endless misery — that God wdll 
torment a large portion of his own offspring in hell to all 
eternity, with no possibility of doing himself, those mise- 
rable sufferers, or any other being in the universe, the least 
imaginable good, but merely to glut his vindictive wrath, 
and satiate his merciless cruelty, notwithstanding he ex- 
pressly declares he " he will not cast off forever" — that he 

will not contend forever, nor be always wroth, lest the 
spirit should fail before him, and the souls he has made"? 
Was it from an attentive perusal of the holy Scriptures 
that you were led to believe in the existence of an almost 
omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, personal devih who 
was once a pure and holy angel in heaven, but now a fal- 
len demon confined in the prison of hell, yet still at large, 
roaming through Europe, Asia, Africa, America, and the 
trackless regions of the ocean, tempting men, women and 
children, to sin, in propria persona, and who shall at last 
succeed in peopling hell with more subjects from among 
the offspring of God, than the Messiah shall be able to 
save and get to heaven ? Was it from the declarations of 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



16? 



Scripture, or from tradition and human authority, that you 
were led to embrace the mysterious and inexplicable doc- 
trine of the trinity — of three distinct "persons in one Gody 
each of which is supreme God, and all of which make no 
more than one Supreme— that one of these persons is the 
Father of another, and yet both are of the same age — that 
while the three are essentially and really one^ the Father 
is not the Son, nor is the Son the Father, and neither of 
these is the Holy Ghost, nor is the Holy Ghost either the 
Father or the Son — a doctrine that was unheard of during 
the three first centuries of the Christian era 1 Was it, Sir, 
from the Gospel of Jesus Christ that you first obtained 
your ideas of the doctrine of vicarious atonement — that in 
consequence of the fall of man, which " God from all eter- 
nity," had " unchangeably foreordained," and the attendant 
corruption and entire prostitution of humaa nature in sin 
and iniquity, whereby all men were justly obnoxious to 
endless and infinite misery, the Deity was so enraged at his 
offending creatures, that nothing short of their universal 
and endless damnation could satisfy him, or what was 
deemed an equivalent thereto, and equally as acceptable 
and well-pleasing in his sight, the infinite sufferings of his 
innocent Son, in their room and stead, whiJe the guilty 
were allowed to escape with impunity — yea, that the Deity 
Am^eZ/* willingly suffered this infinite torment to appease 
his owm anger and reconcile himself to man, paid the infi- 
nite debt, to cancel his own claims ; and yet, after all, the 
debt of millions of them will 7iever be paid, nor his justice 
satiated with their misery? And was it from the "law 
and testimony" of truth, that you imbibed the notion that 
the officers of your church had committed to them " the 
keys of the kingdom of heaven," whereby they are made 
keepers of men's consciences, and umpires to decide their 
eternal destinies, by opening that kingdom to, or shutting 
it against men, according as they should conform, or not 
conform, to all the dogmas and practices of the Presbyte- 
rian church ] 

No, Sir, by whatever specious appearances you may have 
been led into your present belief, such doctrines as these 
find no support in the word of God — they are not sanc- 
tioned by the Gospel of our salvation — are not taught either 
in the Old or New Testament — they are the traditions of 



168 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKIN. 



men, doctrines of human invention, unknown in the days 
of primitive Christianity, and must finally go down to " the 
tomb of the Capulets" — their primeval nonentity. And I 
am sensible, if you will unbend your mind, and allow your- 
self candidly and prayerfully to review your whole system, 
together with all the circumstances under which it was 
embraced, you will be convinced of the truth of what I 
here affirm, and perceive that you adopted your system, 
either from the power of tradition, early association or 
prejudice, the authority of great names, the love of popu- 
larity or self-interest, or some similar cause ; and equally 
sensible am I, that a similar examination would have the 
same effect on thousands of communicants in the Presby- 
terian church. And though I cannot entertain very san- 
guine, I still indulge some faint hopes, that you will give 
yourself the trouble and labor of making this re-examina- 
tion, or that if you do not, some others may, into whose 
hands these letters may chance to fall. Indeed, the ex- 
amination has already commenced with not a few whose 
opinions have formerly coincided with yours ; and the re- 
sult is, what might naturally be expected, an abandonment 
of the system. And this work of investigation must and 
will go on, whether ^^ou approve or disapprove. The hu- 
man mind is beginning to be awakened from its slumber, 
and to shake itself from the dust of tradition. 

Many of the eagle-eyed leaders of your sect have dis- 
covered this, to them startling fact, and have redoubled 
their diligence to trammel the minds of all over whom 
they have any influence, before they shall be able to judge 
for themselves what is right and what is wrong. Hence, 
the extraordinary efTorts that are now being made to indoc- 
trinate the tender minds of children with the peculiar dog- 
mas of your church, before they arrive to years of under- 
standing. Hence, too, the extraordinary and simultaneous 
movements, throughout our country, by your clergy, in 
getting up and carrying on what you denominate revivals^ 
the tendency of which is, to drive into your ranks, through 
the fear of hell, thousands who could not be drawn in by 
the power of truth and the love of God; to induce thou- 
sands to profess that do not possess religion, with a view 
evidently of preventing them from imbibing other doc- 
trines, as they most surely would, if left to themselves. 



LETTERS TO REV, S. C. AIKIN. 



169 



Hence, in many instances, the abandonment or conceal- 
ment of the most odious parts of your system, in the time 
of excitement, till the converts are secured by enlisting 
under the Presbyterian banner, when having once surren- 
dered their reason and judgment to the direction of the 
clergy, they may afterwards be indoctrinated by degrees, 
and with less danger of resistance. Thousands have thus 
surrendered themselves to the guidance of the clergy, and 
become slaves for life, to doctrines, the reasonableness and 
scripturality of which they could never see ; hundreds have 
been driven to life-lasting melancholy and despair, and led 
to believe themselves reprobates, because they could not 
see and understand the tremendous doctrines of your creed ; 
and multitudes have been driven to insanity and suicide 
from the same cause, believing the doctrines true because 
they had heard no other, and being unable to bring the 
bC'nevolence of their own hearts to acquiesce in such a 
soul-chilling theory. 

These extraordinary excitements, falsely called revivals of 
religion^which evidently originated in the cause,and are em- 
ployed for the purposes, above named, are anew thing with 
your denomination, wholly disapproved by all your fathers 
and many of your cotemporaries in the ministry, and de- 
nounced as disorganizing, fanatical and dangerous. And 
such indeed they evidently are ; but they must have their 
day. It must, however, be a short one; for the evil will 
correct itself, when the returning good sense of the people 
shall put an everlasting quietus on such extravagance. 
Inquiry is abroad in the earth. Light has begun to dawn 
and it will continue to shine " more and more unto the 
perfect day." 

But there is one evil resulting from these extravagancies 
in practice, viewed in connexion with the doctrines of your 
church, of too fatal and pernicious consequences to be 
viewed with indifference, or passed over in silence here. 
It is their obvious tendency fb infidelity— the lamentable 
fact, that hundreds of naturally good minds have thereby 
been driven to bathe in the sluggish waters of Deism, or 
plunge into the dark gulf of Atheism. The benevolent 
mind can'" ;t. contemplate on the awful doctrines of your 
creed bv ' vuh instinctive .abhorrence ; and with equal 
revulsiou !o its absurdities strike the understanding of the 

15 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. ADON. 



enlightened. Look, Sir, at the leaders of infidelity, both 
of the old and new world — who are they ? and w4at are 
theyl and w^hat has driven them where they now are? 
Taylor and Carlisle, the leaders of infidelity in England, 
were once staunch believers in what is called Orthodox}', 
all the leading doctrines of your creed — Frances Wright, 
and both the Owens, and I believe Houston likewise, were 
all educated and trained up in the belief of the same — and 
they cherished and hugged those doctrines with a Zealand 
devotion that would have done honor to a better cause, 
until at last they became nauseated with such fulsome 
draughts, and disgusted by the near and constant contem- 
plation of such monstrous absurdities, and with them re- 
^nounced the Bible and the whole of Christianity, not dis- 
criminating between the wheat and the tares, or the 
doctrines and principles really belonging to Christianity, 
and those dogmas and inventions of men palmed ofi' upon 
mankind in the abused name of Christianity. And mul- 
titudes in this country are now following in their footsteps, 
from the same cause, and plunging in the Lethean waters 
of infidelit3\ And so long as the leading doctrines of your 
creed are preached and sought to be enforced by the fana- 
tical movements and operations of modern revivalists, so 
long will infidelity hold up its head in this country, and 
boldl}^ bid defiance to successful opposition — so long will 
its every arrow be pointed with the keenest and even with 
successful satire, when dipped in the dogmas of your creed, 
and its every shaft will hit its maj'k, when, though appa- 
rently aimed at Christianity, it is i?i reality only aimed at 
what has been falsely called and mistaken for such, viz., 
the system of nominal Orthodoxy. 

These, Sir, are the honest and sober convictions of my 
mind, plainly expressed. They may not be very welcome 
to you ; but I could not withhold them consistently with 
a sense of duty. I am more and more convinced, every 
year of my life, that Calvinism*does naturally lead to skep- 
ticism, and that in the revolting principles of that creed are 
hid and nourished, the seeds which have given rise lo the 
greatest part of the infidelity which prevails in the Chris- 
tian world. It is related of Lord Shaftsbury, that, on ask- 
ing Bishop Burnet if the doctrine of eternal torment was 
actually taught in the Bible, and being answered in the 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AIKiN. 



171 



affirmative, he immediately replied, "I cannot embrace a 
system which inculcates a doctrine so utterly opposed to 
all jast ideas of the character of the merciful Ruler of the 
universe." And what man in existence, possessing the 
common feelings of humanity, and the attributes of com- 
mon sense, that would not commend the wisdom of the 
reply, and heartily respond amea to its sentiment, if unbi- 
assed by prepossession ? A benevolent and enlightened 
mind cannot receive the doctrine of endless misery and its 
concomitants, as the truth of Heaven revealed to man. 
Convince such that these doctrines are not taught in the 
Bible — that so far from countenancing such unworthy 
views of the character of God, and such heart-rending 
ideas of the destiny of man, it teaches the infinite wisdom, 
power, and goodness of God — that he is the universal 
Father, Friend and Saviour of his children, infinitely and 
unchangeably benevolent to all, and that he " hath spoken 
of the restitution of all things, by the mouth of all his 
holy prophets, since the world began;" — and he whose 
face w^as before averted with disgust and horror, will turn 
and listen ; he who was about to reject the whole of Chris- 
tianity as unworthy of his notice, wiU joyfully embrace it 
as infinitely worthy the character of God as its author, of 
Christ as its mediator, and of the acceptance, obedience, 
joy, and everlasting gratitude of man. And, Sir, it is my 
firm and unwavering belief that the doctrine of impartial 
grace and the final holiness and happiness of all mankind, 
is the only doctrine that can save this country from the 
desolating spread and blighting influence of infidelity — 
that this alone is adapted to this end, and loill succeed ulti- 
mately in saving, not only this nation, but all the nations 
of the earth, both from infidelity on one hand, and deba- 
sing superstition on the other, and will at last bring all 
nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues into the 
joyful embrace and obedience of the glorious Gospel of 
the ever-blessed God. This alone can reach the cases 
and confer happiness on thousands of our race, to whom 
no other doctrine could bring any benefit. This alone is 
adapted to all nations of men, and all climes and coun- 
tries of the earth, and this alone must prevail, if ever the 
millenium takes place. It is, I believe, the truth of God, 
and wiU prevail — -it is for the honor of God, and he will 



172 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN 



give success to it — it is for the benefit and salvation of many 
and he will receive it. 

And now, dear Sir, if you look upon this doctrine ^^ith 
that abhorrence and dread with which you have hitherto 
professed to regard it; if you verily believe it to be false 
and deceptive, dangerous and pernicious, I earnestly and 
solemnly call on you to come before the public and prove 
it such — lay open the deep veins of its hidden iniquity — 
expose it to the scorn and contempt of a deceived public — 
show that it has no foundation in Scripture, reason, or the 
nature of things — redeem your character as the determin- 
ed opponent of error and falsehood, and rescue communit}^ 
from the deceptive wiles of an artful and insidious foe. 
Or if, as a minister of the Gospel, you cannot perceive it 
to be your duty to come out and attack error penly, face 
to face, and you still adhere to the doctrines of 'our creed, 
believing your system to be the truth of God, you will 
certainly find labor enough here to employ your talents 
and exert all your powers in defending it. Your fort is 
besieged, your ramparts are thrown down, your very cita- 
del is entered, and the arms and ammunition there laid up 
in store, are employed in razing to the ground the very last 
vestige of your boasted city. Come forth, then, as the 
bold soldier of Jesus Christ, gird on your whole armor, 
and fight m^anfully for the truth — let not the army of the 
aliens prevail — if you have any regard for the truth, any 
love of immortal souls, any desire to sustain the honor of 
your cause, any wish to regain and revive the faded lau- 
rels of John Calvin — in short, if you have any ambition 
to redeem the departing glories of Presbyterianism, I be- 
seech you to prove yourself worthy of the place you fill, 
and the talents I have supposed you to possess. I have 
not, heretofore, called on you to come out and defend your 
system from the assaults that have been made upon it in 
the course of this series of letters ; nor have I supposed 
it would be of any use to do it till I had concluded what I 
had to say ; but having now completed the series, I think 
I have a right to make that call ; and I hope it will not be 
in vain. I think you owe it to me, to your congregation, 
to the public, and above all, to your cause and your God, 
if you believe Presbyterianism to be the doctrine of the 
Bible, to come forth with your strong reasons to sustain it, 



LETTERS TO REV» S. C. AIKIN. 



173 



If you neglect this solemn and imperious duty, what will 
the public think and say of such neglect ? Can it not be 
as justly said of you, as it was of some of the ancient 
watchmen of Israel, by the prophet Isaiah, " They are all 
dumb dogs, they cannot bark ; sleeping, lying down, loving 
to slumber'' 1 And how will you answer, for such neglect, 
to your conscience and your God'? If you see me and 
multitudes of others embracing what you believe to be fatal 
and destructive errors, errors too that you believe will land 
us in eternal wo, and you put not forth your hand, nor lift 
a finger to save — if you believe your system to be the truth 
that sanctifies and saves the souls of those that embrace it, 
and you neglect to come forth and defend it when it is as- 
saulted, and in consequence of this neglect, multitudes 
never see nor understand that truth, and multitudes more 
are led to renounce and give it up forever, to their eternal 
loss, how, I ask, will you answer to your conscience and 
your God, for such neglect % or how appear before the tri- 
bunal of your final Judge ? I hope, dear Sir, you will 
never incur the guilt of such neglect. 

You have nothing to fear. Sir, by coming up manfully 
to the work of investigation — at least nothing that a good 
and honest man need fear. For truth can never suffer by 
investigation — it always appears to still greater advan- 
tage — and the more severe the fiery ordeal it endures, the 
brighter will the gold appear when it comes forth. And 
should you succeed in establishing your own doctrine, and 
removing all objections ; in overthrowing mine, and con- 
vincing me of my error, you certainly will not deem the 
labor spent in vain ; for in that case I promise you I would 
at once renounce my doctrine and embrace yours, and as 
zealously defend, as I now oppose it. And if, on the other 
hand, you should fail, be overcome in the struggle, and 
your system whelmed in ruin, your defeat would be a vic- 
tory, and the downfall of your system, your triumph — and 
for this plain reason : you are constantly praying that your 
doctrine may be false and mine true, and by such downfall 
of the former, you would have the joyful satisfaction of 
believing your prayers were answered, and, with me, you 
would triumph in the hope of a world's salvation. 

I have now done. I have used great plainness of speech, 
perhaps too great ; if so, I trust you will pardon the error. 

15^ 



174 



LETTERS TO REV. S. C. AlKIN. 



If in aught I have said, I have injured your feelings, I sin- 
cerely regret it. I did not intend it. I abhor the distin- 
guishing doctrines of your creed, esteem them false and 
pernicious, and while I remain of my present opinion, shall 
do all that I can in an honest and honorable way to oppose 
them ; but for your person, your character, and your hap- 
piness, I entertain the highest and sincerest regard. As 
a man and a citizen, I highly respect you ; as a Christian 
and philanthropist, I love you. I shall ever pray for your 
prosperity and happiness, and w^ould cheerfully do aught 
in my power to increase them ; and equally happy shall I 
ever be to reciprocate with you the kind offices of friend- 
ship, and the tokens of brotherly love. A difference of 
faith, though my feelings in regard to systems are what I 
have expressed, yet alters not my affections or feelings for 
the man. 

With my best washes for your long life, and an increase 
of happiness and usefulness every succeeding year there- 
of, I subscribe myself, Kev. and dear Sir, very respectfully 
and sincerely your friend and brother in the Gospel of our 
common Lord. Dolphus Skinner. 



A BIBLE CREED, 



AND 



LETTERS TO 



REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 



Pastor of the Second Presbyterian Church in Utica. 



A BIBLE CEEED. 



Article 1. Concerning God and Christ. We believe 
that the Lord our God is one Lord — that we all have one 
Father ; one God hath created us — and hath made of one 
blood all nations of men^ to dwell on all the face of the 
earth — that though there be that are called gods, whether 
in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many and lords 
many,) yet to us there is but one God, THE FATHER, of 
whom are all things, and we in him ; and one Lord Jesus: 
Christy by whom are all things and we by him, (for God 
hath made him both Lord and Christ,) for there is one God 
and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ 
Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in 
due time. Deut. vi : 4 ; Markxii : 29 ; Mai. ii : 10 ; Acts 
ii : 36, and xvii : 26 ; 1 Cor. viii : 5, 6 ; 1 Tim. ii : 5, 6. 

Art. 2. Concerning the character of God. We believe 
the Lord our God is the Almighty, and of great power — 
that his understanding (or wisdom) is infinite — that he is 
love itself — good unto all, and his tender mercies over all 
his works — that he loveth all the things that are, and abhor- 
reth nothing that his hands have made, for he never would 
have created any thing to have hated it — that he is ^just 
God and a Saviour — who will have all men to be saved 
and come to the knowledge of the truth, and who worketh 
all things after the counsel of his own will — that in him 
mercy and truth are met together, righteousness and peace 
have embraced each other. Gen. xvii : 1 ; Ps. cxlvii : 5, 
and Ixxxv : 10, and xlv : 9 ; Wisdom xi : 24 ; Isa. xlv : 
21 ; 1 Tim. ii : 4 ; Eph. i : 11 ; 1 John iv : 8, 16. 

Art. 3. Concerning the mission and mediation of Christ. 
We believe God sent his Son to be the Saviour of the 
world — that to this end, (as he loved both his Son and the 
world,) he gave all things into his hand, even power over 
all Jiesh, that he might give eternal life to as many as the 
Father hath given him, and that all th^t the Father gav« 



178 



A BIBLE CREED. 



him shall so come to him as not to be cast out — that as he 
tasted death for every man, and is a propitiation for the 
sins of the whole world, he shall see of the travail of his 
soul and be satisfied — that as in Adam all die, even so in 
Christ all shall be made alive — that having brought life 
and immortality to light by the Gospel, he shall continue 
to reign until death, the last enemy, is destroj^ed, and all 
things are subdued unto him ; till every knee shall bow 
and every tongue confess him Lord to the glory of God 
the Father — and that then he will deliver up the reconciled 
kingdom to the Father, that God may be all in all. 1 John 
ii : 2, and iv : 14; John iii : 85, vi : 37, xvii: 2; Heb. 
ii : 9 ; Isa. liii : 11 ; 1 Cor. xv : 22, 24-28 ; 2 Tim. i : 10 ; 
Phil, ii : 10, 11. 

Art. 4. Conceiming the motive to obedience, &c. We 
believe it is our duty to love God because he first loved 
us — that if God so loved us, we ought also to love one 
another — that the goodness of Godleadeth to repentance — 
that the grace of God that bringelh salvation to all men 
hath appeared, teaching us, that, denying ungodliness and 
worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously and god- 
ly in this present world — -and that those who believe in 
God ought to be careful to maintain good works ; for these 
things are good and profitable unto men. 1 John iv : 11, 
19; Rom. ii: 4; Titus ii : 11, 12, and iii : 8. 

Art. 5. Concerning the reivard of obedience. We be- 
lieve that great peace have they who love God's law, and 
nothing shall offend them — they are like trees planted by 
the rivers of water, that bring forth their fruit in season ; 
their leaf also shall not wither ; and whatsoever they do 
shall prosper— that wisdom's ways are ways of pleasant- 
ness and all her paths are peace — that she is a tree of life 
to them that lay hold of her, and happy is every one that 
retaineth her — that Christ's yoke is easy and his burthen 
is light, and all who come to him find rest to their souls — 
that we which have believed do enter into rest — that,though 
God is the Saviour of all men, he is especially so of the 
believer — and that whoso looketh into the perfect law of 
liberty, and continueth therein, and is not a forgetful hearer, 
but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed. 
Ps. i : 3, and cxix: 165; Prov. iii : 17, 18; Matt, xi : 28- 
30 ; Heb. iii : 3 ; 1 Tim. iv : 10 ; . Jsimes i : 25. 



A BIBLE CREED. 



179 



Art. 6. Concerning punishment for disohedience. We 
believe the way of the transgressor is hard — that the wick- 
ed are like the troubled sea when it cannot rest, whose wa- 
ters cast up mire and dirt, for there is no peace, saith our 
God to the wicked — that he that doeth wrong shall receive 
for the wrong which he hath done ; and there is no respect 
of persons — that God will render to every man according 
to his deeds — tribulation and anguish upon every soul oi 
man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gen- 
tile. Prov. xiii: 15; Isa. Ivii : 20,21; Matt, xvi: 27; 
Rom. ii : 6, 9 ; Col. iii : 25. 

Art. 7. Concerning the limitation and remedial design 
of punishment. We believe the Lord will not cast off for- 
ever ; but though he cause grief, yet will he have compas- 
sion according to the multitude of his mercies — that he 
will not contend forever, nor be always wroth, lest the 
spirit should fail before him, and the souls he has made — 
that although he may apparently forsake his children for 
a small moment, yet with great mercies will he gather 
them — in a little wrath he may hide his face from them 
for a small moment, but with everlasting kindness will he 
have mercy on them, and heal them, and lead them also, 
and restore comforts unto them — that whom he loveth he 
chasteneth, (and he loveth and chasteneth all,) for their 
profit, that they may be partakers of his holiness, and be 
enabled afterwards to say, " before I was afflicted I went 
astray, but novv have I kept thy word." Lam. iii : 31, 32; 
Isa. iiv : 7, 8, and Ivii: 16-18; Heb. xii : 7-11 ; Psalm 
Ixxxix : 30-35, and cxix : 67. 

Art. 8. Concerning the Scriptures, the doctrines they 
teach, and the duties they enjoin. We believe that all 
Scripture given by inspiration of God, is profitable for doc- 
trine, for reproof, for correction and instruction in righte- 
ousness — that the prophecy came not in old time by the 
will of man ; but holy men of God spake as they were 
moved by the Holy Spirit — that God hath spoken of the 
restitution of all things by the mouth of all his holy pro- 
phets since the world began — that the word, gone out of 
his month in righteousness, shall not return void, but shall 
accomplish that which he pleases, insomuch that every knee 
shall bow, and every tongue shall sw^ear, saying, In the 
Lord have I righteousness and strength. From the Scrip- 



180 



A BIBLE CREEi). 



tures, (which we take as the rule and guide of our faith 
and practice,) we are taught that the whole duty of man, 
is, to fear God and keep his commandments ; to deal justly, 
love mercy, and walk humbly with God ; to do good to all 
men as we have opportunity ; and that pure religion and 
undefiled before God and the Father, is this, to visit the 
fatherless and widows in their affliction, and keep ourselves 
uncorrupted from the world. 2 Tim. iii ; 16 ; 2 Peter i : 
21 ; Acts iii : 21 ; Isa. xlv : 23, 24, and Iv : 11 ; Mic. vi : 
8 ; Eccl. xii : 13 ; Gal. vi : 10 ; James i : 27. 

[The above creed, it is believed — inasmuch as it is drawn 
exclusively from the Bible — will be entirely unexceptiona- 
ble with all sincere believers in, and disciples of, our Lord 
Jesus Christ. It may therefore be safely adopted by all ; 
and by most, will doubtless be considered amply sufficient 
to answer all the ordinary purposes of a creed. We have, 
however, for certain reasons, thought proper to annex — 
which may be adopted or rejected, just as those who read 
it choose — the following] 

Addenda, 

Item 1. We believe a certain class of people existed 
about eighteen hundred years ago, who were called Pha- 
risees. 

Item 2. We believe these ancient Pharisees esteemed 
themselves righteous, and despised others — that they 
thanked God they were not like other men — and said to 
others, " stand by thyself, come not near to me, for I am 
holier than thou." 

Item 3.* We believe they loved the uppermost rooms at 
feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and greet- 
ings in the markets, and to be called of men Rabbi, Rabbi — 
made long prayers to be seen of men — fasted often — wore 
a sad countenance — paid tithes of the much they possess- 
ed^ — and gave alms merely to be seen of men, being always 
careful to sound a trumpet before them when they gave. 

Item 4. We believe these people were extremely punc- 
tilious in the observance of small matters, outward forms 
and ceremonies, new moons and Sabbath days, paying tithe 
of mint, and anise, and cummin, but neglecting the 



A BIBLE CREED, 



181 



weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy and faith— 
and that they bitterly persecuted the benevolent Jesus, and 
accused him of being a wicked Sabbath breaker,^ and a 
friend of publicans and sinners. 

Item 5. We believe these ancient Pharisees were great 
advocates for mmio7Z5, insomuch that they even compassed 
sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he was made 
they made him (if possible) two-fold more the child of hell 
than themselves — that for the purpose of carrying on these 
missions, they devoured widoiv^s houses, for a pretence ma- 
king long prayers, and laid heavy burthens, and grievous 
to be borne,* on men's shoulders, which they would not move 
with one of their fingers. 

Item 6. We believe this ancient sect formed a religiotis 
party in politics, and under the pretence of reforming the 
nation from their degeneracy, made a great outcry against 
Sabbath breaking and drunkenness (as in their accusations 
against Jesus) and thus made themselves, outwardly, like 
whited sepulchres, but within were full of extortion and 
excess, dead men's bones and all uncleanness. 

Item 7. We believe these people were in the habit of 
straining at gnats and swallowing camels without number — 
and that they were a set of blind guides and arrant hypo- 
crites ! for which belief we have the high authority of the 
greatest Reformer and the most faithful preacher who was 
ever in the world. 

Item 8. And lastly : We believe there are a similar set 
of people in the world at the present day, 

* Doctor Lansing was exceedingly biUer, about this time, against 
Col. Johnson's Report on Sunday Mails, and all who concurred in 
the principles maintained in that Report. 



16 



LETTER I . 



On the subject of the Boctor^s Lectures against Universal' 
ism — Misreprese?itatio?i — a call for a candid hearing 
and fair treatment. 

Dear Sir — I make no apology for addressing you in 
this public manner ; nor do I deem that either yourself, or 
the public, or propriety will demand one. 

You have lately commeliced delivering a course of lec- 
tures, on Sunday evenings, in your church, against the 
rapidly prevailing heresy of Universalism, or rather what 
you are pleased to call Universalism ; though as far as I 
can learn, you have not yet stated the doctrine held by this 
denomination, nor any thing that resembles it. I had the 
pleasure, or rather the patience, to hear your second intro- 
duction to the subject of your discussion. Since then my 
engagements have been such, that I have not been favored 
vWth the opportunity of hearing you, nor do I expect to 
have the privilege again before the course of lectures is 
complajed, as I am engaged at a distance from home, every 
Sabbath, for a few weeks to come.^ 

I am, however, informed by those who have heard- all 
you have yet said on the subject, (what I expected from 
the specimen I heard,) that youi* discourses are principally 
made up of misrepresentation and abuse — in repeating the 
same stale charges that have been hundreds of times refu- 
ted and shown to be false — in vehement declamation, 
accompanied with violent gesticulation, concerning the 
dreadfully dangerous and licentious tendency of Univer- 
salism, ccc. &c. Now for all these things you are known 
to be very conspicuous : whether it proceeds from igno- 
rance or malice, I shall not pretend to determine. But 
from the opportunities you have enjoyed, I should hardly 
think it could proceed from the former. What confirms 
me in this suspicion, is, that you studiously and carefully 
keep your own creed out of sight, and oppose what you 

* In this expectation T was happily disappointed, (as the subsequent 
letters will show,) for I afterwards attended several of the Doctor's 
lectures on Universalism. 



LETTEIIS TO REV, C. LANSING, D. D. 183 



call Universalism, wholl}?' on Arminian ground, which I 
cai^not believe you would do if you were honest You 
first caricature Universalism, making it something very 
different from what it is in reality — you then step out of 
your own ranks, and take the uniform and ammunition of 
your Arminian neighbor, and commence an assault and 
battery on an enemy of your own making. You set up a 
man of straw, making it as vulnerable as you please ; then 
telling your people, that is Universalis^n^ you draw your 
^ow^ and let fly your arrow,^ If this fails of bringing 
the monster down, you next apply the tomahaiGk ; and if 
this fails, why a little hrimstone may be .used to assist in 
firing it ; and we all know that straw is extremely combus- 
tible. 

Lest, however, all this might possibly proceed from igno- 
rance of the real sentiments of Universalists, I have con- 
cluded to favor you and the public, (as you will have seen 
above,) with a " Bible creed,^' which contains, in sub- 
stance, the sentiments of all U7iiversalists with whom I am 
acquainted. Now, Sir, if you wish to €ombat Universal- 
ism itself (instedid of its caricature) on fair and honorable 
ground, and finally and effectually it dow7i forever, all 
you have got to do, is, to refute the above Bible creed. 
And if this be your motive, I ask you (and your compli- 
ance or non-compliance with my request will determine 
ihis fact in my mind) to take this creed into your desk to- 
morrow evening, — read it through to your congregation, 
fully and fairly, without any ellipses — then placing one 
hand on your heart, and lifting the other with your eyes 
to heaven, solemnly declare, in the presence of God and 
your congregation, that you verily believe this creed is 
" false as the serpent, and mischievous as hell" — then go 
to work and refute it from beginning to end — show its op- 
position to the Scriptures and to enlightened reason — its 
licentious tendency and pernicious influence in society. 
Then come out openly and honorably in your own colors, 
and establish the doctrine of the Genevan reformer — the 
Calvinistic notion of particular election and reprobation, 
and endless unholiness and misery — without going on to 

* This allusion to the Indian mode of warfare will be perfectly un- 
derstood by all the Doctor's friends, who have heard that he boasts of 
having desaended from the celebrated Pocahontas, 



184 LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 

Arminian ground — show that God hates his own children, 
and will torment them eternally, agreeably to his primeval 
decree before they were created, &:c. &;c., and your work 
is done. Universalism will go down " to the tomb of the 
Capulets/' We shall all hide our heads in shame and con- 
fusion, and no more open our mouths or move our pens in 
defence of so pernicious an error. Nay, more, we shall 
even join your church, give you the right hand of fellow- 
ship, and our cordial support till the day of our death ; and 
at last, crave a dying blessing on the head of so distin- 
guished a benefactor as yourself, and depart, blessing God 
for the heart-cheering consolations of the doctrine of ne- 
ver-ending misery! 

With all due respect, I am, dear Sir, 

Your obedient servant. 

Utica, January 23, 1830. 

P. S. Should you discover any thing in the addenda to 
the " Bible creed" worthy of particular notice, I beg you 
will not let that divert your attention from the main sub- 
ject, viz. the creed itself. After you have fairly disposed 
of the creed, you are at liberty to make what use you 
please of the addenda. 



LETTER II. 



The subject continued — Examination of Matt, xxv : 46, 
and its parallels. 

Dear Sir — I am happy to hear that you still continue 
your lectures, in your church, on Sunday evenings, against 
the doctrine of Universalism ; and that having got through 
with repeating the lectures here that you delivered in Au- 
burn, on the same subject, you have concluded to advance 
another step — having said all you proposed to say on the 
text in Matt, xxv : 46, you have now commenced on a text 
in the Apocalypse, concerning death and hell being cast 
into the lake of fire, &;c. I am perfectly agreed with you 
in the opinion that your lectures will be the means, under 
God, of doing much good in this place. They have al- 
ready called the attention of many to the subject, who had 
before scarcely ever thought of it, and produced a spirit of 
inquiry and investigation of the subject, which, if contin- 
ued, cannot but result favorably to the cause of truth. All 
that is necessary, is to have the people inquire and examine 
with candor for themselves. Let this be done, and I have 
no fears as to the result. It has already had the salutary 
effect to convince several of your hearers of the truth of 
the doctrine you so bitterly and disingenuously oppose and 
misrepresent. 

I very much regret, Sir, that you neglected complying 
with the reasonable request I made in my letter to you of 
the 23d ult., and declined reading the " Bible creed" to 
your congregation. Of this I should have had little rea- 
son to complain, had you read even as much as the adden- 
da. But I have concluded that the only reason why you 
did not read them to your congregation, was, that the first 
was very far from expressing your sentiments — and you 
knew not how to refute it — and to read the second, would 
have been quite too humilitating for your carnal heart to 
submit to. 

However, as I am never weary of well doing, although 
you have failed of profiting by the advice I gave you before, 
1 am still inclined to exert my feeble faculties to do you 



186 LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 



all the good in my power : and I have some further advice 
to give you on the important subject of your present labors. 

You will recollect that the course you pursued in your 
lectures on the parable of the sheep and goats, was, to 
consider it a literal representation of ^ very momentous 
event yet future ^ in another woxldi, and another state of be- 
ing. This you did without even an attemjpt to prove that 
such was the true application of the text. You even told 
your hearers, in amount, on the evening that I heard you, 
that this application was so clear and self-evident that it 
needed no proof to make it more so. Now, although your 
penetrating vision might be so clear as to discover this point 
intuitively^ without any arguments in its favor, yet many 
of your hearers were so stupidly ignorant as Xo want proof 
of its truth. And what rendered them so incredulous, as 
to the truth of this assertion, w^as the fact, that the text 
with its context would immediately associate itself, in their 
minds, with several other parallel texts that were particu- 
larly explained by our Saviour to relate wholly to events 
of that generation i?i which he spoke. You Vv-ill recollect 
the parable of the sheep and goats commences, (Matt, xxv : 
31,) thus : " When the Son of man shall come in his glory, 
and all his holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon 
the throne of his glory : and before him shall be gathered 
all 7iatio7is,^^ &c. Many, if not all, of your hearers be- 
lieved this to be the same coming of the So?i of 7?ia7i, men- 
lioned Matt, xvi : 27, 28. " For the Son of man shall come 
in the glory of his Father, with his angels ; and then he 
shall reward evej^y 7nan according to his works. Yerily I 
say unto you, there he some sta7iding here, which shall not 
taste of death, till they see the So?i of 7nan corning in his 
kingdom^ And Mark viii : 38, ix : 1, " Whosoever, there- 
fore, shall be ashamed of me and my w^ords, in this adul- 
terous generation, of him also shall the So?z of man be 
ashamed, lolien he coineth i7i the glory of his Father with 
the holy angels. And he said unto them, Yerily I say un- 
to you, that there be so77ie of the7n that stand here which 
shall 7iot taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God 
co7ne with power,'''' And Luke ix: 26, 27. " For whoso- 
ever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall 
the ^on of man be ashamed, when he shall come i7i his 
oivn glory, and in his Father^s^ and of the holy angels. 



LETTERS TO REV. D. LANSING) D* 



187 



But I tell you of a truth, there he some standing here which 
shall not taste of death till they see the kingdom of God.^^ 
Many of your hearers, too, discover an intimate connexion 
between the whole of the 24th and 25th chapters of Mat- 
thew, and as the Saviour spoke in both, of his " coming 
with power and great glory," &c., enumerating in the 24th, 
the signs that should precede his coming, after which he 
adds, verse 34, " Verily I say unto you, this generation shall 
not pass^ till all these things he fulfilled (see also Luke 
xxi : 32 ;) people of common intellect cannot discover what 
the Saviour did mean, unless he meant as he said. They 
consider that he did " come with power and great glory" 
in judgment upon that generation — that "his angels," or 
messengers, included both the angels (messengers) of mer- 
cy, viz : the preachers of the Gospel, and the angels (mes- 
sengers) of vengeance, viz : the Roman armies ; and that 
believers and unbelievers, obedient and disobedient, disci- 
ples and apostates, friends and enemies, of the Saviour, 
were dealt with according to their characters and deserts ; 
either in being delivered from, or suffering the impending 
calamities that then hung over the land of Judea; — that 
the separation did take place, and still continues — the gulf 
is " fixed," and will remain till the fulness of the Gen- 
tiles be come in," when all Israel shall be saved ;" that 
the nation of unbelieving Jews were dispersed, scattered 
abroad, went " away into everlasting punishment," or cor- 
rection, " prepared for the adversary and his messengers," 
w^hile the obedient and faithful disciples were received into 
the " aionian life^^ of the Gospel — for " this is life eternal 
that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus 
Christ whom thou hast sent." 

Now^ Sir, the request I have to make of you, is, that 
you will undeceive your common sense sort of hearers, by 
going over the ground again, and showing them, by proof 
" strong as Holy Writ," that Jesus meant no such thing as 
they understand him to mean. Show that the expression, 
" this generation^'' means some thoiisands of years hence ^ 
and in another state of heing. Show them that the ex- 
pression, " Son of man coming in his kingdom,''^ means 
ma)Lkind going into another world. Show them that the 
Greek word, kolasin^ rendered punishment in the text, verse 
46, which according to lexicographers, means a pruning of 



188 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 



excrescences, a lopping off of redundancies, or correction 
or chastisement for the good of the punished, means in 
reality no such thing ; but that on the contrary, it means, 
tormenting mankind in hell to all eternity — placing them 
in a condition where they can never be corrected — can ne- 
ver be chastised for their profit that they may become par- 
lakers of holiness. Show that because God hates si?!, he 
will therefore perpetuate it to all eternity — because he 
wants men to become holy, he will therefore place them in 
a condition chat will forever preclude the possibility of their 
becoming so ! 

After you have gotten through with this task, and con- 
vinced your hearers that you are favored with supernatural 
visions of the infernal regions, know their exact latitude 
and longitude, and all the apparatus employed there to in- 
flict torture upon the offspring of the Deity, and exactly 
who are to suffer 

Eternal plague?, and heavy chain?, 
Tormenting racks and fiery coals, 
And darts t' inflict immortal pains, 
Dipt in the blood of damned souls 

after you have done all this, then you may with propriety 
proceed to the subject now in your hands, concerning death 
and hell being cast into the lake of fire, &c. And her-e 
you will have an ample field in which to display your ex- 
traordinary talents. You may show that the casting of 
death and hell into the lake of fire does not signify their 
destruction ; but that the fire will prove a sort of preserva- 
tive, to cure them properly, so that they can be kept on 
hand to all eternity, to serve as a sort of pastime for saints 
in heaven, while viewing the torments of their miserable 
subjects below\ In order to do this, however, effectually, 
you will have to prove that God was mistaken when he 
said, (Hosea xiii : 14,) " I will ransom them from the 
power of hell,'^ (the same word rendered hell in Eevela- 
tion) " I will redeem them from death : O, death, I will be 
thy plagues ; 0, hell, I will be thy destruction," &:c. You 
will also have to show that St. Paul was very w^ide from 
the truth w^hen he said, " Death, the last enemy shall be 
destroyed," &:c. However, I presume you will get along 
with these difficulties well enough — they will be but mere 
straws in your way. And then, too, the dexterity with 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D, D. 



189 



which you can show that a finite creature can commit an 
infinite act, or that finite act of a finite creature can merit 
or deserve an infinite 'penalty — that streams can rise higher 
than their fountains — that effects can be far greater than 
their causes, (fee, will make it all fair weather. 

When you have succeeded in accomplishing all this, .1 
presume your people, at least the members of your church, 
will believe, (without your telling them of it,) that all your 
labprs have been performed solely from feelings of disin- 
terested benevolence, and your love of souls, without any 
regard to securing yourself a good living, or even the most 
distant thought of any such thing as " filthy lucre." 
Yours, &;c. 

TMca, February 13, 1830. 



LETTER III. 

Slanderous charges against Universalism refuted — Its licen- 
tious tendency, its infidelity, its want of sanctions, hy- 
pocrisy, character of females, &c. &c. 

Dear Sir— I was present at your meeting last Sunday 
evening, and heard the philippic which you then and there 
delivered against the doctrine of universal salvation, a doc- 
trine which I solemnly believe to be the everlasting and 
immutable truth of God and his word. And considering 
the course you pursued, and the shocking language you 
used on that occasion, I deem it an imperious duty incum- 
bent on me to address you this letter, sincerely hoping and 
praying that you may receive some benefit from it, if in- 
deed you are susceptible of being benefitted by any human 
instrument. 

I intreat you. Sir, to pause, and seriously " ponder the 
paths of your feet" and the words of your mouth, while 
I pass in review some of the most prominent features of 
your last Sunday evening's harangue, (fqr I dq nqt consi- 
der it entitle^ tq the namq of a sprrf^pn.) 



190 LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, t). 3j. 



In your commencement, and as the foundation of what 
followed, you stated this proposition, (I shall not pretend 
to give your language verbatim, though I shall fairly state 
your meaning,) viz : " That in exact proportion as men 
disbelieved in future rewards and punishments, moral re* 
straints were v/eakened and the bands of vice and iniquity 
were strengthened." By future punishment you here 
meant endless damnation^ as the whole tenor of your sub- 
sequent remarks clearly showed. For you w^ere opposing 
the doctrine of the salvation of all men ; and you knew 
that many of this faith believed in future limited punish- 
ment. You therefore evidently meant that in exact pro- 
portion as the doctrine of endless misery was rejected and 
disbelieved, vice and immorality would prevail. You then 
stated that common observation of the character and con- 
duct of men proved the proposition true — that wherever 
men rejected this doctrine and " mocked at hell," they were 
unprincipled and abandoned wretches — intimating that this 
was the case with all Universalists. Now, Sir, permit me 
to tell you — though you cannot be ignorant of the fact — 
that Universalists believe in all the hell that the Bible 
teaches — they do not " mock" at the hell of which the 
Scriptures give an account. If they mock at any hell, it is 
the one which modern Orthodoxy has built ; and it is on 
the same principle that Elijah " mocked" at the absurd no- 
tions and idolatrous rites of Baal's false prophets. 1 Kings 
xviii : 27. We do verily believe in a hell that is not to be 
mocked at, and that many people actually go there, as Da- 
vid did when he sinned : nay more, that the pains of hell 
even get hold of them. David says " the pains of hell gat 
hold of me :" and again, " thou hast delivered my soul 
from the lowest hell." Will you point out a lower than 
the loivest ? 

You next proceeded to state that all nations and states, 
all legislators, philosophers and moralists, had acknow- 
ledged the necessity of some sanctions or penalties to laws. 
This is correct, and Universalists are among the very first 
to admit and maintain the maxim. But they are not wil- 
ling to admit sanctions or penalties that would defeat the 
very object for which they were designed ; as would obvi- 
ously be the case with endless penalties. You then en- 
deavored to show that the Heathens had their hell, called 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 191 



tartarus^ which answered exactly to the one in which Jyou 
believed, a hell in which all infidels and wicked people 
would suffer to all eternity. But, Sir, what does this prove, 
excepting that your doctrine of hell partakes more of Hea- 
thenism than of Christianity ? But, Sir, it is a libel even 
on the Heathen to accuse them of holding to so tremendous 
a hell as you do. If you will consult Brucker's " Histo- 
rica Critica PhilosophsB," by William Enfield, L. L. D., 
you will find the wisest and most learned even of the Hea- 
then themselves, were more reasonable than to admit that 
these torments in hell, or tartarus, would be endless. 

You stated, that as far as your knowledge extended, those 
who disbelieved in future punishment (meaning all who 
do not believe in endless damnation) were the most aban- 
doned characters in creation — that it was these (i. e. Uni- 
versalists) that constituted the greatest part of all those 
who fell under criminal proscription, convicts in State's 
prisons and penitentiaries, the inmates of alms-houses 
and houses of correction, criminals of every degree — that 
their crimes and abominations were, in nine cases out of 
ten, to be traced to this cause, viz. the doctrine you oppo- 
sed ; or in other words, to Universalism ! Now, Sir, is it 
possible that you can have lived in Auburn for a number 
of years, where one of our State's prisons is located, and 
be ignorant of the fact, that when a thorough examination 
and search was made, five or six years ago, among the 
convicts in that prison, not a single individual could be 
found who believed in Universalism — not one who would 
avow his faith in the salvation of all men — while at the 
same time, multitudes were found there shut up, who were 
staunch believers and advocates of your favorite doctrine 
of endless damnation ? and even several who had been 
preachers of it? Can you be ignorant of the fact that the 
search was made about the same time in the other State's 
prison in New-York, and of six hundred and twenty- 
three convicts there at that time, 7iot one could be found 
who acknowledged himself a Universalist ? Now, Sir, 
assertion is not argument ; and facts speak much louder 
than words. How comes it to pass, if Universalism be 
he cause of all the crimes committed in the land, that so 
many Calvinists have got into State's prisons, and but very 
few, if any, Universalists can be found there? But per- 



192 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 



haps you will explain this mystery, hy saying, " the righte- 
ous have to suffer a great deal more than the wicked do, 
in this world, therefore the poor persecuted righteous Cal- 
vinists have had to be shut up in State's prisons, while the 
wicked Universalists are allowed to go unpunished. But 
the scenes will be reversed in the next world." 

Again, you charge Universalists with levity — say they 
treat the subject of religion lightly, ridicule their oppo- 
nents, call them Pharisees, hypocrites, &c. In reply to 
this charge, I am bold to affirm, that no real or consistent 
Universalist ever treats the subject of religion lightly — it 
is too serious and important a subject to be thus treated by 
us. And I hope to convince you that I am serious in this 
letter, before I get through. There are, however, certain 
opinions, absurdities and follies of raen, from which they 
will neither be persuaded nor reasoned, that are in them- 
selves really ridiculous, and deserve to be treated as such ; 
an example and divine authority for which we have in the 
case of Elijah's ridiculing the absurdities of Baal's false 
prophets, as above mentioned : and when men are really 
Pharisees and hypocrites, is it wrong to imitate the exam 
pie of Jesus, and give them their proper names ? I seri- 
ously wish. Dr. Lansing, that I could be convinced you 
did not deserve either of these names. 

True, you acknowledged that Universalists were many 
of them possessed of bright genius, quick to perceive, and 
ready in wit and argument. But they gave themselves up 
to the uncontrolled sway of their passions ; and the strength 
of their passions made them reason wrong. In order to 
gratify all their corrupt passions, they persuaded them- 
selves that there was no hell, (I have before shown this 
charge to be entirely false.) And after you had charged 
upon Universalism nine-tenths of all the crimes commit- 
ted by mankind, you said, " But their hearts are not natu- 
rally any worse than ours — our hearts, brethren, are natu- 
rally as bad theirs,^^ Well, Sir, I shall not dispute you in 
this last particular, for there were doubtless many in your 
congregation, who thought this as true a sentence as you 
uttered, and they had " demonstration strong," that eve- 
ning, of its truth. 

You next proceeded to show the dreadful consequences 
of disbelieving in your favorite dogma of endless damna- 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 



193 



tion ; and directed the attention of your hearers to the 
wickedness of those Heathen nations where the belief of 
this had never prevailed, (notwithstanding you had before 
stated it to be the belief of nearly all the Heathen world,) 
and to complete the picture, pointed them to " infidel 
France," saying, "here we behold an appalling beacon to 
warn us of the danger ,* a beacon fed with the oil of hu- 
man blood ! Behold infidel France, scathed with the deso- 
lating blast, the blighting curse of the Almighty, for her 
crimes ; and the streets of Paris drenched with human 
blood — see on her posts, her pillars, and at the entrance of 
her grave-yards, this chilling motto, in staring capitals, 
DEATH IS AN ETERNAL SLEEP!" 

But, Sir, let me ask, what was the cause of this desola- 
ting blast, this blighting curse, with which infidel France 
was scathed] or rather let me ask, what was the cause of 
her infidelity and carnage ? Was it Universalism ] No, 
Sir, it was the want of it. It was the absurdities in theo- 
ry, and the abominations in practice, the monstrous op- 
pression and tyranny of the clergy of France, of the be- 
lievers and preachers of never-ending lao in the future 
world, that d7^ove the people to the opposite extreme of infi- 
delity, and France to the dreadful extremity which you 
named. Let the mild and peaceful religion of Jesus, the 
doctrine of impartial grace, which teaches that God is the 
universal Father, and Friend, and Saviour of all men — 
the doctrine of equal rights and privileges to all — that all 
are equally dear in the sight of Heaven — let this doctrine 
have been generally inculcated and exemplified in France, 
and that fair country would never have experienced that 
" desolating blast" that followed the inculcation of infinite 
partiality, cruelty and wo. 

Again ; as if it were not enough for you falsely to in- 
sinuate that the cause of all these calamities is to be traced 
to the want of faith in endless misery, you proceeded to 
demand, " if atheism, or the belief in annihilation, produ- 
ced such awful crimes and calamities, what eflfects would 
this doctrine which I am now opposing, (viz. universal 
salvation,) produce, were it to become generally prevalent? 
Its effects would be ten-fold more dreadful, even than 
atheism !" Try it. Dr. Lansing ; try this doctrine, as long 
as the doctrine of endless misery has been tried ; let it 

17 



194 



LETTERS TO REV. I>. C. LANSING, D, 



have a fair experiment; arxd if its effects are one-half 
bad as the effects of that doctrine, you shall never be ask- 
ed to try it again. What has not the doctrine of endless 
misery done to destroy peace and happiness in the world I 
It has planted the standard of persecution wherever it has 
prevailed. It was this that put to death a John Huss,and 
Jerome of Prague. It was tkis^ Sir, that kindled the fire 
of Geneva, and heaped the green withes around Servetus. 
It was this that established that infernal master-piece of 
hell, the Spanish Inquisition. It was this that kindled the 
fire of Smithfield. But why do I mention names ? It was 
this that tortured, in the most cruel manner, and put to 
death more than fifty millions of Protestants in Europe — 
that drove our puritanic fathers across the Atlantic — and 
that, carrying its own deadly bane with it, hung innocent 
Quakers and banished honest Baptists in America. And? 
Sir, it is this that is now seeking to overthrov/ the free 
institutions of our happy land, unite Church and State, 
establish an American Inquisition, and restore the lost 
power to its abettors to burn and murder heretics for the 
glory of God and the good of souls 1 

But as if you had not yet made yourself appear suffi- 
ciently ridiculous in venting your malicious spleen against 
the most benevolent doctrine ever taught in the world, a 
doctrine at the annunciation of which, angels shouted 
" glory to God in the highest, and on earth, peace and good 
will towards men" — you proceeded to say, that, if you were 
to relinquish your present views, (viz. the doctrine of end- 
less misery,) you would rather go down to the dark and 
miserable sewer of the atheist, than to adopt these views 
which you were opposing, viz : the doctrine of universal 
salvation I ! Oh, horrible- indeed ! This was as much as 
to say, that if you could not liereafter be privileged with 
beholding the infinite and endless miseries of the damned in 
hell,or as the hymn you read, stated, "see devils plunge them 
down to hell, in infinite despair," you did not wish to exist ! 
that you had rather be struck out of being, into blank an- 
nihilation, than to be so tormented and mortified, as to see 
every son and daughter of Adam made penitent, humble, 
holy and happy, as XJniversalists teach ! Alas ! Sir, what are 
we to think of the mind that conceived, and the heart that 
dictated this sentence? I leave you and n:iy readers to judge. 



l"^:ti:ers to ^iev. d. c. lansing, d. d. 195 

I shall now pass to consider what you said in relation 
to the obligations of oaths, or their ties upon conscience, 
and in relation to English laws, or the opinions of English 
jurists upon this subject. Your statements were intended 
to convey the idea, that all eminent legislators, jurists and 
civilians, especially those of England, had laid it down as 
an axiom, that unless your doctrine of endless misery in 
another world, were believed, there could be no tie upon 
the conscience—no witness could be allowed to give his 
testimony under oath, in a civil court. Perhaps, Sir, you 
wish to have this country under the jurisdiction of English 
laws. If it should be, you might possibly be deprived of 
your living, unless your conscience were pliable enough to 
subscribe to the thirty-nine articles of the Church of Eng- 
land, (of which latter circumstance, however, I have very 
little reason to doubt.) But I must here beg leave to tell 
you, that the above statement betrayed a palpable ignorance 
of the laws of England, and the opinions of her most emi- 
nent civilians, as well as the opinions of the most distin- 
guished American jurists. 

The English law of evidence at one period, required 
witnesses to be sworn on the Holy Evangelists or Chris- 
tian Scriptures ; and Lord Coke certainly laid down the 
rule to be, that an infidel could not be a witness — Coke 
Litt. 6 p. From this opinion. Lord Hale, and the Judges 
of a later period differed and pointed out its unsoundness. 
The subject, however, received the fullest illustration in 
the argument and decision in the great case of Omichund 
vs. Barker. That cause was heard so late as the year 
1744. Lord Chancellor Hardwicke was desirous to have 
the question of evidence solemnly settled, and obtained the 
assistance of Lord Chief Justice Lee, Lord Chief Justice 
Willes, of the Common Pleas, and Lord Chief Baron Par- 
ker. It was argued before that tribunal, by Sir Dudley 
Rider, and Mr. Murray, (both subsequently Chief Justices,) 
and by other eminent counsel. The Judges and the Chan- 
cellor, took time to consider, and delivered their opinions 
seriatim. The judgment of the Court, was, that Gentoos 
sworn according to their religious ceremonies, were com- 
petent witnesses, though they were not Christians, and 
acknowledged none of its peculiar doctrines. That case 
is best and most fully reported in 1 Atk. 2L It is also 



196 LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LAJ?SINGj D. D. 



reported in Willes, 538. The latter is short and only valu- 
able as giving Lord Chief Justice Willes' opinion more 
fully and accurately than it is reported in Atkins. These 
Judges examined with great learning the opinion of Lord 
Coke, and refuted it triumphantly. It is unnecessary to 
follow the whole course of their arguments, but I think it 
proper to refer to particular passages of some of their opin- 
ions, as illustrating the question now before us. The Lord 
Chancellor in his judgment, states, (p. 38, 1 Atk.) that 
his object was to be certain ichether these people (Gentoos) 
believed in the being of a God^ and his providence ? Being 
satisfied of that, he admitted them to be competent w^it- 
nesses. He also states that Bishop Sanderson laid down 
the proper TM\e^ juris jurameiitum est offirmatio religiosa. 
And all that was necessary to an oath, is an appeal to the Su- 
preme Being, as thinking him the avenger of falsehood, 
and the rewarder of truth. This, Lord Hardwicke adds, 
is not contradicted by a single writer, known to him, but 
Lord Coke. In the report of Lord Chief Justice Willes' 
judgment, as stated in his own notes, there are some par- 
ticulars which it is proper to notice. He refutes the nar- 
row notion of Lord Coke, that an infidel, or person who 
did not believe in the Christian religion, could not be re- 
ceived as a witness, and states, that (even according to 
Lord Coke) Jurameii turn nihil aliud est quain Deum in 
testem vacare ; and therefore, nothing but a belief of a God, 
and that he will rev/ard and punish us according to our 
deserts, is necessary to qualify a man to take an oath. In 
p. 549, he says that such infidels, (if any such there be,) 
who do not believe in a God, or if they do, do not think he 
will punish them iyi this worlds or the next, cannot be wit- 
nesses, because an oath cannot be any tie or obligation on 
them. 

Notwithstanding this great decision, the question has 
since been made at different times. Starkie, in his excel- 
lent treatise on evidence, lays it down, that before a wit- 
ness is sworn, he may be asked whether he believes in the 
existence of a God, in the obligation of an oath, and in a 
future state of rewards and punishments ; and if he does 
not, he cannot be admitted to give evidence ; for which he 
cites Peake's N. Pr. Reports 11. He does not, how- 
ever, distinguish whether the state of future rewards and 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D, 



197 



punishments, is to be in this world or the next, or in both. 
We have seen that Chief Justice Willes expressly states 
his opinion to be, that a person who believes in a God, and 
rewards and punishments in this life, is a competent wit- 
ness. And Lord Chancellor Hardwicke expressly says, 
(p. 43, of Atk.,) My intention was to be certified whether 
these people believed in God and his providence." And 
lower down he agrees with Bishop Sanderson, " that all 
that is necessary to an oath, is an appeal to the Supreme 
Being, as the rewarder of truth and avenger of falsehood." 

In 2d Cowen's Reports, New-York, on this question, in 
the case of Butts vs. Swartout, Cowen, 431, it was deci- 
ded, that one w^ho believes in the existence of a God, is a 
competent witness. The marginal note goes further. But 
the opinions expressed by a person offered as a witness, 
sworn to by another witness, were, that he believed in 
the Deity, and in the doctrine of universal salvation." 
He was admitted to be sworn. In one case before the Cir- 
cuit Court, the People, vs. Matteson, Judge Walworth de- 
livered the judgment of the court. It is decided that the 
belief of rewards and punishments in this life, is sufficient 
to admit a witness to be sworn. In a clear view of the 
subject, the Judge shews that the elementary writers have 
all been misled by Atkins, who in his report of Omichund 
TS. Barker, ascribes to Chief Justice Willes, an opinion 
which he did not entertain, as appears by his own report 
of what his real opinion was. This error arose from the 
confidence reposed in the accuracy of Atkins, whose error 
was never corrected until the publication of Willes' Re- 
ports, thirty years after. He also cites a case from 15th 
Mass. Rep. 184, wherein it was decided that the infidelity 
of a witness, as to a future state of existence, goes to his 
credibility, and not to his competency. In short, that 
wherever you have a tie on the conscience, the witness is 
admissible. 

In a note in 2d Cowen, pp. 572, 3, 4, Judge Williams de- 
livers a clear opinion, that it is not necessary, in order to 
render a man a competent witness, that he should believe 
any thing more than that there is a Supreme Being, and that 
he will reward and punish, either in this or in another life." 

But, Sir, notwithstanding these clear decisions, and irre- 
futable arguments against the correctness of your position, 

17^ 



198 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. B. 



by the most eminent jurists in England and this country, 
you still persevere in your unhallowed eiforts to stigma- 
tize, brand with infamy, deprive of their civil rights, and 
disfranchise a respectable portion of your fellow-citizens. 
By the principles which you attempted to establish, thou- 
sands and tens of thousands of our fellow-citizens would 
be subjected to outlawry — and justice to their persons, 
rights and property, couid never be done. The honest 
husbandman, mechanic, or merchant, could not be allowed 
to swear to his book accounts — the thief, the robber, and 
the murderer would escape the penalties of the law, if no 
witnesses could be procured but such as rejected your 
dogma of endless misery. The husband or the father 
might be bound by the ruffian libertine, and the chastity of 
his wife or daughter violated with impunity, in his sight — ■ 
the arm of the civil law could not touch the villain, if no 
one beheld the deed but such as believed, with the apostle, 
that " God is the Saviour of all men," and all the barriers 
of civil society w^ould be broken down, and the cords of 
domestic peace and safety severed, by your exclusive, per- 
secuting, and disfranchising principles ! Pause, then, Dr. 
Lansing, I beseech you, and seriously and prayerfully con- 
sider the subject once more. 

You were not however content to stop, after having 
gone thus far, and palmed upon your deluded hearers such 
dreadful principles as the above ; but you then went onto 
stigmatize, slander, abuse and misrepresent Universalists 
still more — you stated that it was among people of their 
'principles that nearly or quite all perjurers were to be 
found — that Universalists were prepared by their princi- 
ples to perjure or forsw^ear themselves — that they have 
nothing to fear, if they can only keep clear of the laws of 
the land, (intimating that they considered the laws which 
punished criminals, very unjust and cruel,) — that they do 
not believe God ever did or ever will take vengeance on 
the guilty — that therefore they do not and cannot feel the 
obligation of an oath ; because an oath is an appeal to God 
a§ the avenger of crime and punisher of guilt — You then 
a4ded, "if there are any Universalists here, I \v5uld advise 
you never to take an oath — at least not in the usual form — 
because every time you do take one in this form, you say 
yx)ur doctrine is a lie ; you acknowledge it is false in that 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, B. D. 



199 



very oath." Now Dr. Lansing, I believe that you not 
only meant to be uncharitable and slanderous in the above 
statements, but that you did certainly know they were not 
true — that you meant to tell an absolute and downright 
falsehood, I am aware that this statement will appear 
rather harsh and severe to you ; but a sense of duty to 
you, as well as myself, pronipts me to make it. You can- 
not be totally ignorant of the sentiments of Universalists : 
or if you are, jowt ignorance, especially when you pretend 
to a knowledge of it, and undertake to expose and refute 
it, is almost as criminal as a wilful misrepresentation of it. 
But you are not ignorant of it — you know that all Uni- 
versalists believe, or profess to believe, that there is a God 
who JUDGETH m THE EARTH — that he is the avenger of 
crimes— that he will sooner or later inflict a condign pun- 
ishment upon all wilful transgressors — that he that doeth 
wrong shall receive for the wrong that he hath done, and 
there is no respect of persons with God." The question 
between the Universalists and their religious opponents, 
is not, whether sinners will he punished, but whether God 
loill torment them to all eternity, luithout designing them 
any good.. And you must have known this when you 
made the above gross misstatements. I cannot, therefore, 
view these statements in any other light than as wilful and 
absolute falsehoods, however solemn your visage and voice 
when you made them, or however great your protestations 
of a solemn sense of duty urging you on to that labor, and 
that you were " doing it up for the great judgment day." 

Again ; as you stated that nearly all perjurers were to 
be found among Universalists, I wish you to inform me 
whether it was Universalism that influenced Arthur Tap- 
pan, the great pioneer of Calvinism in the city of New- 
York, to contradict himself so repeatedly, while under 
oath, at a late trial in that city? 

Again, Sir, have yoit not a salvo according to your sys- 
tem, against the punishment of perjurers, thieves, robbers, 
and murderers? Will you not absolve them from all pen- 
alties if they will repent (or ?ay they repent) and join 

your church ? 1 do not say these things are so — I merely 
ask the question. 

Another specimen of your charity," in the " faithful 
di charge of your duty" is found in the following decla- 
im 



200 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. 



ration. " But after all," said you, " there is one redeem- 
ing principle. Notwithstanding the pernicious and dread- 
ful tendency of Universalism, there is one redeeming 
principle with those who embrace it. It is this — a con- 
viction of their own consciences that the doctrine is false — 
they cannot become so abandoned as fully to believe it — con- 
science tells them they lie ^ when they say they believe itJ^ 
This, Sir, I shall pass without comment. I merely ask, if 
you consider hypocrisy the only redeeming principle ? 

You next said that wherever this doctrine (Universal- 
ism) was believed, all the domestic and social ties of life 
were dissolved and sundered — there was nothing that could 
bind the husband to the wife or the wife to the husband — 
the marriage vows and obligations were of no force — there 
was nothing to prevent the husband in a moment of pas- 
sionate excitement or disgust, from totally abandoning the 
wife to wretchedness and ruin ! ! I beseech you, dear Sir, 
to look at this statement with the eye of dispassionate can- 
dor and soberness, and consider what is its natural import 
and bearing. Am I to understand by this, Sir, that you 
are not bound to your ivife and family by any other tie 
than the fear of endless damnation and infinite wo ? Am 
I to understand you that neither the love of God, nor the 
love of man — neither conjugal love nor parental affection — 
find a place in your bosom? that if it were not for the fear 
of an endless hell, you would abandon your wife to hopeless 
wretchedness and despair, and your children to destruc- 
tion? If so, I say, " the good Lord deliver me," and my 
wife, and my friends, and all the females of this land, from 
a man of such principles ! 

Again, with mock solemnity and pretended love of souls, 
you appealed to the prejudices of your congregation, in an 
address to parents, saying, " Fathers and mothers, how do 
you feel, in relation to this subject ? even you that profess to 
believe this doctrine — can you — dare you teach it to your 
children 1 Dare you throw away their souls, or commit 
them to such a dangerous bark as Universalism ? If you 
are determined to die eternally yourselves, don't, I beseech 
you, don't kill your dear little children !" Just as if Uni- 
versalists knew their doctrine was false, and that nothing 
but the heavenly doctrine of endless damnation in hell could 
possibly save them ! " How do you live with your children 



LSTtEHS fO iiEV. D. C. LANSING, 1). D. 201 



at home? Do you call them around the family altar and 
pray with them, and read God's word to them, and talk of 
the boundless love of God ?" &c. But, Sir, how does the 
" boundless love of God" comport with your doctrine which 
teaches that God will torment the greatest part of his own 
offspring to all eternity, and that the fear of an endless 
hell is the foundation of all moral virtue? My intellect 
is so obtuse I cannot understand this. The boundless 
love of God and the doctrines of the Bible, are the princi- 
pal things in which Universalist parents instruct their chil- 
dren. 

But you asked, " Do we not know that by far the great- 
est proportion of Universalists swear instead of praying V 
In answer to this question (however cantingly put) I will 
say, that Universalists as a denomination probably are not 
free from imperfection, and doubtless many individuals 
called by this name have their faults and vices, which is 
indeed a source of regret to every virtuous mind ; but I 
do not believe there is as much profanity among Univer- 
salists — those who sincerely believe the doctrine — as there 
is among other denominations. For our principles are en- 
tirely at variance with this vice. It is the most inconsis- 
tent thing in the world for a Universalist to curse, swear, 
and damn his neighbor : because he does not believe his 
God will curse or damn any of his creatures to all eternity. 
But is it not perfectly consistent for Calvinists to curse and 
damn their fellow-beings ? Is it not right for them to damn 
those they believe God will damn? As for praying, Uni- 
versalists are not in the habit of boastings either of the 
number or loudness of their prayers : but I may truly say, 
that they feel as deep and lively an interest in the welfare 
and happiness of their children as any people can feel, and 
as often bear them in their humble prayers and desires to 
the throne of God, which they know to be a throne of 
grace and mercy, and therefore they can pray in faith, 
nothing doubting." Permit me now to ask, how yo7ir 
children are brought up and how they conduct in life? 
Whether any of them ever sioear or conduct frowardly. 
I merely ask these questions, leaving you to answer them, 
if you will, according as the truth may be. If any of 
them are profane or immoral, I advise you by all means 
to teach them Calvinism no longer; but try Universalismj 



202 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 



and see if its inflaence is not more salutary than what they 
have hitherto been taught. 

But, Sir, all the gall and bitterness of soul that flowed 
from you that evening — all the abuse and scandal which 
you heaped upon Universalists in general — must fall in 
the back ground, and be considered light and trifling, when 
compared with what I am now about to notice, which fell 
from your lips towards the close of your harangue — I al* 
iude to your shameful, cowardly and slanderous assault 
upon the character of females I It was indeed to have been 
hoped, at least, that the female part of your audience would 
be allowed to escape the gall-envenomed shafts that were 
hurled so liberally at others. But no; even the mostvir* 
tuous females in the world, if they chanced to differ in 
opinion from your orthodox majesty, could not escape ; but 
must have their characters thus publicly and uncourteously 
assailed. You represented all females who fully believed 
in the doctrine of impartial and universal grace, as either 
abandoned characters, or very far from being respectable ; 
telling your hearers they might depend on it, that, wherever 
a female was found who embraced this doctrine fully, there 
was some radical defect of moral character. You then 
added, (with Vvhat I considered a solemn mockery,) that 
you would as soon follow the lifeless corpse of a son to 
the grave, as to follow him to a wedding with a female of 
these principles I I think. Sir, very few females of these 
principles would covet a union with the son of such a fa- 
ther, if he partook in any measure of the spirit, disposition 
and manners of his sire. After admonishing all young 
men never to marry females of these principles, you then, 
in order to render your victory complete, advised all the 
female part of your audience never to marry Universalist 
husbands, if they valued the happiness of their lives or 
the safety of their souls. Oh, what subtlet}^ and guile, 
what art and canting hypocrisy were here ! By this ma- 
noeuvre you doubtless thought either to frighten or shame 
all your female hearers either out of their reason or their 
independence, so far at least, that they would never dare 
attend a Universalist meeting, nor neglect your own; and 
thus securing them^ you calculated their attractions would 
of course attach the young men to your congregation. But 
the artful guise was seen through. There were several 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 203 



Universalist females present that evening — young ladies 
too, of the most spotless and virtuous character, and who 
are neither ashamed nor afraid to avow their belief in the 
doctrine of impartial grace. So far from being " led away 
captive" at your will, by your sneering and raillery, their 
cheeks were suffused with the glow of virtuous indigna- 
tion at your barbarous and malicious assault upon their 
characters. And it is not very probable you will again 
have the opportunity of insulting them to their faces — at 
least not in your church. 

Again, you thought perhaps to gain your end, in part, 
by saying, " it is well there are but few, but very few fe- 
males who believe this doctrine," (viz. Universalism.) But> 
Sir, did you suppose, because you had succeeded in fright- 
ening and leading astray so many women and girls by 
your arts and machinations, that therefore you might cal- 
culate on nearly all of them ? If so, you will yet find out 
your sad mistake. There are many thousands of them in 
our land, and several scores of them even in this city, 
who are ornaments to their sex and their profession, who 
are not ashamed to ow^n their belief that " Christ gave him» 
self a ransom for all to be testified in due time," and "shall 
see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied" — that he is, 
as the Bible declares him to be, " the Saviour of the 
Vv^oRLD," instead of an elect few, out of the world. Of 
the most of these females — who have been freed from a 
slavish fear, delivered from the bondage of the gross su- 
perstitions under which your deluded followers are now 
groaning, and had the love of God and the hopes of the 
everlasting Gospel planted in their hearts, instead of those 
superstitious fears — of these it m.ay be truly said, as it was 
of Dorcas of old, " these women are full of good works, 
and alms deeds which they do," though their "good w^orks" 
do not consist in attending meetings to hear their charac- 
ters aspersed and in obeying the dictum of D. C. Lansing. 

Before closing this long epistle I wish to ask you one 
question — As you prayed, last Sunday evening, apparently 
with fervency ^ for the salvation of all souls — that God would 
not come down in wrath upon sinners and cut them off in 
their sins, but that he would humble the proud, and subdue 
the stubborn souls, and bring them to repentance and faith, 
and finally sanctify and save them, I wish to ask you 



204 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 



whether, if God should hear and answer your prayers, and 
finally bring all to the enjoyment of that salvation for 
which you prayed, whether, under these circumstances, you 
would feel so bad as to wish to be struck out of being, and 
" go down to the dark and miserable sewer of the atheist" ? 
Or, in other words, whether your prayer was the sincere 
desire of your hearty and the ^rai/er of faith, or the solemn 
mockery of the hypocrite? 

And now, Sir, praying that God may convince you of 
all your ungodly deeds, which you have ungodly commit- 
ted, and of all your hard speeches which you have ungod- 
ly spoken against him and his children, and bring you to 
sincere repentance and reformation, I subscribe myself, 
Yours, with all the respect due to such a man. 

Viica, March 6, 1830. 



LETTER IV. 

Discussion of Scripture testimony — 1 John iv : 1 ; 2 Tim. 
iv : 1-7 ; Mark ix : 43-47, xvi : 16 ; John iii : 36 ; 
Matt. V : 29, 30. 

Sir — I feel myself again called upon to address you 
publicly on the subject of your late lectures on Universal- 
ism. Though I have fully discharged my duty to you in 
a former communication ; and though I consider you be- 
yond the reach of argument, determined not to exercise 
tliat reason with which God has endowed you, and your 
" heart" so " fully set in you to do evil," that neither gen- 
tle persuasion nor severe rebuke will have any effect on 
you whatever ; yet duty to my God, to my own conscience, 
to the cause in which I am engaged, and to an insulted and 
abused public, requires this labor at my hand ; and you 
may rest assured, that when duty to these, requires it, I 
shall not be backward in obeying the call. 

Should any part of this communication appear like 
yielding to Solomon's proverbial exhortation, to " answer 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 205 



a fool according to his folly," it will be, that you may not 
" be wise" in the conceit of your followers^ rather than of 
yowx own conceit." And should \he antithesis oi 
proverb — " answer not a fool according to his folly" — be 
observed, it will surely be for this reason operating on my 
mind — " lest thou be like him." 

T was present at your last Sunday evening's meeting, 
and heard what you stated to be the closing, or lasto( your 
thirteen lectures on TJiiiversalism, Your text was read in 

1 John iv : 1. " Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try 
the spirits, whether they are of God ; for many false pro- 
phets are gone out into the world." This text. Sir, I be- 
lieve was not only verified in the days of the apostle who 
penned it, but that we have both occular and auricular de- 
monstration of its truth and more full verification in the 
present day. After repeating your text, you turned to 

2 Tim. iv, and read the first five, and seventh verses : 
" This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall 
come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covet- 
ous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, 
unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, truce-break- 
ers, /aZ^e accusers, incontinent, j^erce, despisersof those that 
are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasure 
more than lovers of God, having a form of godliness, but 
denying the power thereof : from such turn away." [Here 
I involuntarily found my head "turned away" from the 
speaker.] *' Ever learning, and never able to come at the 
knoioledge of the truth,^^ 

After reading the above, you turned to your congrega- 
tion and said, " Such a sentence, such a particular descrip- 
tion as this, one would think, would close all controversy 
forever, in relation to the persons, or the class of persons, 
here intended by the apostle." And so thought I, Dr. 
Lansing. I thought, however, your hearers would have 
known better how to make the application, and what par- 
ticular sort of people were intended by the apostle, had you 
read the 6th verse, (which by the bye stands directly be- 
tween the 5th and 7th,) which reads thus : " For of this 
sort are they lohich creep into houses, and lead captive silly 
WOMEN," &c. How appropriate ! how particular ! how ex- 
actly does this language describe certain characters in this 
age of the world ! For you had just read over (previous 



206 LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. B". 



to commencing your sermon) the names of ^QYQTdX females, 
whom yoii had thus " led away captive," as candidates for 
admission to your church the next Sabbath ! Who can 
doubt the application of the apostle's words in this case? 

This, Sir, may be considered as " answering a fool ac- 
cording to his folly," By it you can judge experimentally 
how it seems, to have such epithets and appellations as 
the above heaped upon one's self. Had I the least idea 
that you were honest, candid, and. serious in your charges 
against Universalists, and that you did sincerely believe 
one-half you stated about them, that evening, I should 
write in a different style. I would reason, and argue, and 
plead with you ; yea, I would " entreat you as a father," 
to re-consider what you stated, to review the subject, and 
again look into that system against which you so liberally 
hurled your envenomed shafts of unmiiigled malice. But, 
Sir, I am fully persuaded there was no honesty nor candor 
in what you said: and certainly there was no gentleness, 
nor dignity, nor politeness in it. Not for your sake, there- 
fore, but for the sake of my readers and the public, 1 shall 
notice, in a serious manner, some of your charges and im- 
putations against Universalists. 

You stated that " Universalists study the Bible, 'tis true ; 
and many of them are very fluent in quoting the Scrip- 
tures : but then they study it merely to pervert its mean- 
ing, misrepresent its truths, and solely with a view to sup- 
port their own particular doctrine. Neither the morality 
nor the religion of the Bible, will, or can benefit them un- 
der these circumstances. For they study the Bible in order 
to explain away its meaning, Now, Sir, can you, can 
any rational person, believe this is true of Universalists 1 
What motive can we have for adopting such a course as 
thisl Are we not as much interested in the truths con- 
tained in the Bible as any people in the world ? We cer- 
tainly can have no interest in error or falsehood. And if 
the doctrine of endless misery be taught in the Bible, we 
are as much interested to know it as any class of people 
can be. Were we running the race of popularity, and 
seeking the applause of men, we should certainly take a 
different course — we should follow on in the popular cur- 
rent with yourself, and lean on the prejudices, and fatten 
on the credulity of the people. But now we oppose the 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. B. 



207 



popular dogmas of the day, and subject ourselves to the 
reproach and enmity of high-toned Pharisees and perse- 
cuting bigots : And can it be believed that in addition to 
this, we are voluntarily exposing ourselves to endless tor- 
ments in the future wmld ? Impossible ! Were we dis- 
posed to be dishonest, we would certainly be dishonest in 
the popular way ; that if no motive with reference to an 
hereafter could influence as, we might at least have di pre- 
sent motive to lead us to such conduct. 

You stated that " the grand design of God, in revealing 
his will, must have been to increase holiness among men : 
nothing, therefore, can appear in that revelation which is 
hostile to holiness. Hence, the doctrine under considera- 
tion (viz. Universalism) cannot be of God — cannot be 
taught in his revelation — for we have seen in these lec- 
tures, that it does not produce holiness, but the reverse." 
Here, Sir, your predicate is correct ; but your conclusion 
is false and unfounded. For in your lectures you have 
asserted, without proof, or the shadow of evidence, that 
Universalism is immoral, and licentious in its tendency. 
I might assume the same premises, and assert the same of 
Presbyterianism — that it was licentious, and therefore 
could not be of God — with as much propriety, and I think 
with more truth, than you do of Universalism. Can it be, 
Sir, if God designed to increase holiness among men by 
the revelation of his will, that he will place any of them 
in a condition where they must eternally remain unholy? 
If he designed to prevent sin, will he fix any of his crea- 
tures in a state of endless sin, as your theory maintains 
that he will ? 

You say of Universalism, that it makes all the ihreat- 
enings of God perfect folly and nonsense. As examples 
of the expositions of Universalists, and their manner of 
explaining away the threatenings, you stated that they held 
the meaning of these words, (Mark xvi : 16 and John iii : 
36,) — " he that belie veth and is baptized shall be saved, but 
he that believeth not shall be damned," " shall not see life," 
&;c., to be this, viz. " He that believeth shall be saved, and 
he that believeth not shall go to heaven :" and the mean- 
ing of Matt. V : 29, 30, respecting " plucking out right 
eyes, and cutting off right hands," &c. to be this : If thy 
right eye offend thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee ; 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. 



for it is better to go to heaven with one eye, than to ^o td 
heaven with two good eyes !" " If thy right hand offend 
thee, cut it off; for it is better to be a good man and have 
one hand and one eye, than to be a bad man and have two 
hands and two eyes!" You then exclaimed, in view of 
these expositions which you imputed to Universah'sts, " O, 
what folly ! what presumption ! this is putting nonsense 
into the mouth of God Almighty !" Now, Dr. Lansing, 
you did certainly know better than this. In these state- 
ments, you did most maliciously, and wilfully pervert, mis- 
represent, and caricature Universalism ; and you knew it, 
in the time of it. You knew no Universalist ever did thus 
believe, or thus preach, or thus write. You knew these 
imputations against Universalists were as false and as 
wicked as the heart that conceived them. And if any 
thing in the world could convince me of the truth of the 
doctrine of total depravity, certainly the wickedness and 
depravity you manifested that evening, while professedly 
in the service of God, would be set down as among the 
strongest evidences of its truth. 

Suppose, Sir, I were to represent your views of the above 
texts, thus : " Dr. Lansing preaches that, he that believeth 
not shall inevitably be eternally damned— all mankind 
either are, or have once been, unbelievers: therefore Dr. 
Lansing preaches that all mankind will be eternally damn- 
ed ! O, what folly ! what presumption Again : " Dr. 
Lansing preaches that no man can go to heaven, but cer- 
tainly will go to an endless hell, unless he literally plucks 
out his right eye, and literally cuts off his right hand : not 
a single member of Dr. Lansing's church, nor a single 
Presbyterian in the United States, has ever done this : 
therefore all Presbyterians in this country, Dr. Lansing's 
church included, and himself with them, (for I perceive 
you have two hands and two eyes,) will certainly go to an 
endless hell." This, Sir, would be as fair a statement of 
your preaching, and I contend fairer, than you gave of the 
expositions of Universalists. For you gave no explanation 
of these texts at all, other than literal, but left your hearers 
to infer that you believed, unless a man literally plucked 
out an eye and cut off a hand, that he must go to hell. 

I shall now state briefly my views of these texts, not on 
your account, but on account of my readers and the public, 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 209 



Mark xvi : 16. " He that believeth not shall be damned," 
or condemned, (the original being the same for both words,) 
and John iii : 36, are explained by their parallel, John iii : 
18. He that believeth not is condemned already, because 
he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son 
of God." The believer " enters into rest," hath the wit- 
ness in himself," " hath eternal life," (for " this is life eter- 
nal, that they might know the only true God, and Jesus 
Christ whom he has sent,") and rejoices in the hope of 
immortality through Jesus Christ, being " saved" from 
doubt, darkness, fear and mental wretchedness. 

But the unbeliever is damned, or " condemned already," 
" makes God a liar," (or treats him as such,) " because he 
believeth not the record that God gave of his Son ; and 
this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, 
and this life is in his Son.^^ In consequence of disbeliev- 
ing this, the unbeliever is in doubt, darkness, and uncer- 
tainty, under condemnation. But he could not treat God 
as a liar, nor be condemned for not believing, if it were 
not a fact that eternal life was the gift of God, for him, 
through Jesus Christ. Therefore his condemnation will 
remain just as long, and no longer than he remains an 
unbeliever. Neither of these texts declare that any of the 
human family will eternally remain unbelievers ; nor does 
either of them mention or hint at the doctrine of endless 
misery. It is only on the ground that all men will finally 
become believers, tiiat we maintain, agreeably to the gene- 
ral tenor of Scripture, that all will finally be saved. 

The meaning of our Saviour's words, (Matt, v: 29,30, 
and its parallel, Mark ix : 43-47,) " It is profitable for thee 
that one of thy members should perish and not that thy 
whole body should be cast into hell;" was undoubtedly 
this : That it was better for those who heard him, to forego 
some of their present enjoyments, to relinquish some of 
their temporal interests, whether stations or offices of ho- 
nor, emolument or profit, that they might hold under the 
civil or religious economy of the Jews, (even though they 
might be as dear to them as right eyes or right hands,) and 
thus " enter into life," or " the kingdom of heaven," or the 
Gospel dispensation, by becoming followers of him ; than 
it would be to retain those stations or advantages, and re- 
main out of his kingdom, or the light of the Gospel, and 



210 



LETTERS TO REV* D. C. LANSING, D. U. 



be subjected to the awful punishments and dreadful ca«^ 
lamities that would shortly overwhelm that nation in ruin. 
The word here rendered hell, is in the original, Gehenna^ 
literally the valley of Hinnom, situated a little to the south 
east from Jerusalem ; a place as familiar to the Jews, as 
the Mohawk bridge is to the inhabitants of Utica. In this 
valley the Jews, in our Saviour's time, kept a fire con- 
stantly burning in which to consume the carcasses and 
offals of beasts, and the filth that was carried out of the city. 
This circumstance accounts for the phraseology in Mark, 
" where their worm dieth not and the fire is not quench* 
ed." This place had formerly been used for those abomi- 
nable sacrifices, in which the idolatrous Jews had caused 
their children to pass through the fire to Moloch, A par- 
ticular place in this valley was called Tophet ; in Hebrew, 
the fire stove^ in which some suppose they burned their 
children alive to the above idol. After the cessation of 
idolatry among the Jews, their Sanhedrin, or grand coun- 
cil, frequently inflicted punishment upon the Vv^orst of cri- 
minals, by burning them alive, i?i hell, or the valley of Hin* 
nom^ In reference to these dreadful scenes, that w^ere 
associated with the name Gehenna, our Saviour undoubt- 
edly uses the phrase Gehenna, {hell,) and e Gehemia tou 
puros^ {the hell of fire,) figuratively, to represent the dread- 
ful calamities and sufferings of the Jews, or the unbeliev- 
ing part of Israel, when the measure of their iniquities 
should be full, and wrath should come upon them to the 
uttermost — when Jerusalevi itself should be the fire stove 
or Tophet of Gehenna, the furnace in which God would 
gather that wicked people, (as brass, and tin, and iron, and 
lead are gathered in the midst of the furnace,) and blow 
upon them in the fire of his Vv^rath, and melt them. (See 
Ezek. xxi : 31, 32, and xxii : 17-22.) 

The disciples of Christ, by plucking out right eyes and 
cutting off right hands in the sense intended, or becoming 
followers of Jesus, receiving his instructions and obeying 
his admonitions, were enabled to escape with their lives, 
by fleeing from Jerusalem when they saw it compassed 
with armies ; (as he had told them they should know 
thereby, that the desolation thereof was nigh ;) but the un- 
believing Jews were overwhelmed with calamities and de- 
struction when the measure of their iniquities was full 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 



211 



For if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the 
ungodly and the sinner appear Or if, as by a miracle, 
the disciples w^ere enabled to escape with life to the city 
of Peila, when Jerusalem was destroyed, what fate must 
await those who heeded not the instructions of Jesus, not 
knowing when the desolation of their city would come, 
but continued to add sin to sin, every day of their lives? 

Respecting the text, that speaks of destroying " both soul 
and body in hell," or casting into hell, " after he hath killed 
the body," which you repeated with so much apparent exul- 
tation, I observe, learned commentators differ widely re- 
specting the import of the passage. As the word soul is 
susceptible of different constructions, (in many or most 
passages signifying animal life, as in Matt, xvi : 26,) some 
have supposed that the power Jesus warned his disci- 
ples to fear, was, the power of the executioners of the law, 
who had not only the power of taking life, but of taking 
it in the most shocking manner imaginable, even by burn' 
ing alive in hell, or Gehenna, thus destroying the life, or 
soul, and body together ; who also had the power of taking 
life in various other ways, and exposing the dead carcass, 
to rot above ground, to be devoured by worms, to be refu- 
sed the right of burial, that it might be '*an abhorring unto 
all flesh," (see Isa. Ixvi : 24,) and thus disgrace their names 
and memories. See Dr. A. Clarke, on Matt, v : 22, and 
other places, relative to the different tribunals among the 
Jews, and the different degrees of punishment those tribu- 
nals could inflict. Others have supposed no other being 
could be meant but God. But allowing God to be the be- 
ing mentioned, it by no means proves that he 2oill destroy 
any of his children in hell, in another state of being ; his 
having the power to do it, no more proves that he will do 
it, than it proves that he literally raised up seed to Abra- 
ham of the stones of the field, or that Christ commanded 
twelve legions of angels" to come to his assistance when 
he fell into the hands of the Jewish High Priests and El- 
ders, because they had poiver to do it. Much less does it 
prove the doctrine of endless misery; for the word destroy, 
literally signifies, to annihilate: and if the soul be anni- 
hilated, misery will of course cease. But you do not be- 
lieve God ever did, or ever will annihilate a soul. This 
text, therefore, cannot be at all to your purpose. Whatever 



2iS LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSTNG, D. D. 



be its true import, it says nothing about endless misery. 
We should always be careful to put no construction upon 
any doubtful passage of Scripture, that is manifestly against 
the general tenor of the Bible, the known perfections of 
the Deity, or the positive declarations of plain unequivocal 
texts ; such for instance as declare " God is love," — -He 
" is good unto all, and his tender mercies are over all his 
works" — He loves all the things that are, and abhors no- 
thing that he has made — he never would have made any 
thing to have hated it" — He " is the Saviour of all men, — 
will have all men to be saved and come unto the know- 
ledge of the truth" — He is " without variableness or sha- 
dow of turning." 

Sir, the most objectionable, indecent, and slanderous 
part of your last Sunday evening's harangue against Uni- 
versalism, remains yet to be noticed. I shall pursue it no 
farther in this letter, but reserve the remainder till next 
week. In the mean time believe me. Sir, 
Yours with as much respect as ever. 

UOca, AprU 3, 1830. 



L E T T E R V. 

More charges of inconsistency — Impeachment of Divine 
attributes — Cases of Noah and Antediluvians y Sodom, 
Gomorrah^ Corah and his company ^ Judas. Infidels^ &c. 
David's representation of the righteous and wicked, 

Si£j — You observed, secondly^ that " this system (Uni- 
versalism) not only nullifies all the threatenings of God, 
but it impeaches all the dispensations of Providence, and 
accuses God of the most flagrant injustice. They main- 
tain that all the judgment God ever inflicts, is in this 
world — and consists only in turning men into the hell of a 
guilty conscience — when the sinner transgresses, God 
gives him remorse of conscience in proportion to his guilt, 
or perhaps gives him a praying tvife — this by some men 
is considered a sore calamity, a severe judgment, though 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSlNG, D. D. 



^13 



others would not consider it so — or a profligate son," &;c. 
"whereas, if they repent and reform they are delivered 
from all these evils — from the present hell which they 
suffer." 

Sir, the last part of the above charges against Univer- 
salists, was uttered with that sarcastic tone and malicious 
grin that indicated any thing but candor, honesty and sin- 
cerity in your heart. The expression relative to God's 
punishing Universalists with praying wives,^^ &c., was 
undoubtedly intended as a bonne louche for the special 
gusto of some of your dear disciples. Be assured, Sir, 
that Universalists esteem it a blessings instead of Sijudg' 
mentj to have praying wives, in the common and proper 
sense of that phrase — that is, if their wives pray as Paul 
directs, (1 Tim. ii : 1-4,) and pray in faith. On the other 
hand, we should esteem it a sore judgment, and a curse 
indeed, to have our wives pray as did Dr. Lansing, last 
Sunday morning, that God would hurl, headlong, from 
(heir seats in Corigress,''^ such men (you evidently meant) 
as the Hon. R. M. Johnson, or those opposed to a " reli- 
gious party in politics," and place in their stead such de- 
voted Calvinists as would suit your orthodox majesty. 
We should esteem it not only an individual, but a 7za^2o?2flZ 
curse, to have many wives in this country pray thus, if 
there was any probability of their husbands' being influ- 
enced to act out the treason thus breathed forth in their 
prayers. 

In regard to the judgment of a profligate son, with which 
you think Universalists are sometimes visited, I inquire, 
Is it not somewhat unaccountable that you, neighbor Lan- 
sing, should be visited with this Universalist hell in the 
present world, and have the additional torment (unless it 
is a pleasure to you) of anticipating an endless hell for a 
profligate child in the future world ? 

Again, you stated that Universalists held that the wick- 
ed could not die till they repented — that as they must be 
punished in this world for all their crimes, they of course, 
on this supposition, could not die till they had repented, 
or been sufficiently punished for every sin. This, Sir, I 
mention principally for the purpose of showing the in- 
consistency of the charge with what you had previously 
urged against Universalists. You had before accused 



§14 LETTERS TO REV. D. C, LANSING, B. D. 



Universalists of denying the necessity or advantage of 
repentance, and holding that all men might be saved with- 
out repentance — now you say the same denomination hold 
that all will, and must repent, even before they die. You 
tiad before accused us of denying all the threatenings of 
the Bible, and all just punishment for sin — now you say 
we hold, all must be punished for every sin, in this world. 
Which of these accusations. Sir, a're we to consider as now 
laid up against us ? for they certainly cannot both be true. 

You seem to possess more than the eyes of an Argus — 
you discover inconsistencies where there are none, and 
opinions that never had a being. You say, " if all are 
punished in this world sufficiently, or repent before they 
die, according to the belief of Universalists, then they must 
go to heaven on the ground of their ow?i merit ; and hence 
they cannot sing glory to God, nor praise to his grace, for 
they are then entitled to heaven, on the score of merit. 
And even if they suffer a future^ limited punishment, in 
another world, as many of that denomination hold, and 
after suffering the full demerit of their crimes, are saved, 
and admitted to heaven, it is because they are entitled to 
it, having suffered all that justice demanded of them ; and 
hence, no thanks to God, nor to his grace, for their salva- 
tion." What, Sir, let me ask, would you consider the 
grade of intellect possessed by the convicts in our State's 
prison at Auburn, were you to hear them contending, after 
the term of their imprisonment had expired, " we have 
served our time out in the State's prison — we have endu- 
red all the punishment our crimes have deserved, and, 
therefore^ we are entitled to all the honors the State can 
confer, and to all the public lands and ivealth belonging to 
this government — we have justly merzYec? all these things, 
because we have been punished for our thefts, forgeries, 
rapes, burglaries,*' &c. ? And yet. Sir, this plea would be 
far more reasonable than your argument, that, if man suf- 
fers all the punishment his sins deserve, he is therefore 
entitled to heaven on the score of merit. You never heard 
a Universalist contend for the endless felicity of heaven, 
either for himself or any other one, except on the ground 
of its being a free, unmerited gift of God, not of works, 
lest any man should boast; though they all maintain that 
the wicked will be equitably punished, and the virtuous 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 215 



suitably rewarded previous to their participation of thi& 
gift. 

Next, in order to prove the impossibility of any things 
like a just punishment for sin being inflicted in this world, 
you said, look at the prevailing vices and customs of the 
world at-the present day — see the drunkard in his cups, 
drinking, and sickening, and vomiting; — he experiences, 
to be sure, while thus sick and vomiting, considerable trou- 
ble and pain ; but he soon feels a little better, and takes 
another good draught — he is then quite happy, and can 
talk eloquently of the goodness of God ; and at such times 
I have heard the drunkard singing praises to the God of 
love" — [and I too have heard the drunkard at such times 
railing in the severest terms against the licentious tendency 
of TJniversalism, and speaking in terms of the highest 
praise of such men as yourself] — " thus thirty thousand 
drunkards in the United States, are, every year, drinking 
themselves into heaven, according to TJniversalism!'^ 
" Look too, at the accounts of crime in the Old Testa- 
ment — the wicked inhabitants of Noah's time were taken 
away in their wickedness and carried right to heaven ; 
while poor Noah was compelled to linger out a miserable 
life, suffering all bodily and outward calamities any one 
could, and far 7nore in his mind than his wicked neighbors. 
The inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, Corah and his 
wicked company, were all taken to heaven in a moment. 
Judas hung himself and anticipated his Master in enter- 
ing into glory. Look at the millions of murders from 
Abel down to the present time, — the rivers of blood that 
have been shed by infidel cruelty and Papal persecution — 
one set of assassins after another, crying out ' republicanism 
and liberty !' have made their way through rivers of blood 
and seas of carnage, to the light and glory of heaven !" 

This strain, in which you indulged yourself for some 
time, was surely satis eloquenticB, sapientice parum. ; but 
every reflecting mind would at once pronounce it 7'udes 
indigestiqua moles^ so far as arguraent was concerned ; 
and be likely to say, r2iit mole sua. Take, Sir, a dispas- 
sionate survey of all those scenes of blood, carnage and 
murder, and say whether most of them were not perpe- 
trated by the believers in the very doctrine you so strenu- 
ously advocate — by believers in the doctrine of endless 



216 LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, B. B. 



misery ? and, Sir, tiid not Calvin, the very founder of your 
sect, set an example of murder, in the death of Servetus, 
which his followers have been but too zealous to imitate? 
Charge upon Papal persecution as much blood as you 
please, and Protestant believers in endless hell torments 
have done the same thing. But did you ever know of a 
Universalist who murdered any one for his religion ? No, 
never ! 

In relation to the thirty thousand drunkards that are 
annually " drinking themselves into heaven !" I pretend to 
but little knowledge ; but conclude if that is the fact, the 
van of that numerous and motley band must be led by 
some eminent Calvinist preacher, as two or three of your 
own denomination in New-York, Albany, and other places, 
have lately gone off the stage in that kind of style ; ano- 
ther lately broke his neck in a state of intoxication, in 
North Carolina, and two others have recently been excom- 
municated from the Ohio Presbytery for habitual intoxi- 
cation. I will not be positive whether it was brandy or 
"lamp oil" that they drank. 

In regard to the inhabitants of the old world, Sodom 
and Gomorrah, Corah and his company, Judas, &;c., I do 
not know of any Universalist who believes they all went 
instantly, at death, to heaven ; but if you are really con- 
cerned for fear they did — if you are very much disturbed 
at the idea that God changed their hearts in a moment, in 
the twinkling of an eye, made them fit for heaven, by con- 
verting them from sin to holiness, put a stop to their wicked 
career, as he did to that of Saul of Tarsus even before his 
death, and took them directly to heaven — if you are afraid 
God did for them exactly what you profess to be so anxious 
to effect for other similar characters yet living — in short, if 
you are afraid God did not confirm them in iniquity^ and 
place them in a state of endless rebellion against him ; I 
advise you, in order to relieve your mind of such gloomy 
feelings, and put it into a profitable train of reflections, to 
read the articles upon those subjects published in Nos. 11, 
15, 16, and 17, of the third volume of the Evangelical 
Magazine, and Nos. 11 and 15 of the current (first) volume 
of the Magazine and Advocate, which I shall enclose and 
send you with this letter. 

There was, however, in the above named lofty flight of 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 217 



your eloquence, one thrust which you made (though in a 
back-handed manner) at repuhlicanisvi^ which deserves a 
more serious notice. You divided the charges you made, 
of murder and carnage, between infidelity, papacy, and 
republicanism, intimating that the latter had no small share 
in effecting those dreadful evils. From the manner in 
which you expressed yourself, and from similar observa- 
tions which have escaped your lips at other times, there is 
little reason to doubt that you would be glad to have the 
republican institutions of our own country overthrown, 
and in their stead the throne of a political despot erected 
in concert with an ecclesiastical dynasty^ so that the people 
being thus " saddled," the king and the clergy, " ready boot- 
ed and spurred, could ride them legally by the grace of 
God," as Mr. Jefferson said. But thanks to an indulgent 
Providence, we are yet a free people ; and I trust that, not 
until the names of Washington, Jefferson and Franklin 
are forgotten, and their spirits cease to hover around us, 
and not till some of the best blood in our country is spilt, 
will your dominant sect succeed in prostrating the liberties 
of this nation and erecting on their ruins the throne of a 
spiritual hierarchy. 

I shall here notice another back-handed thrust, an un- 
generous inuendo, which you made against Universalisis, 
during your performance that evening. It was this : "How," 
said you, " shall we account for the sufferings of the apos- 
tles, when contrasted with the happiness and prosperity 
David represents the wicked as enjoying, unless we admit 
the doctrine of future (endless) punishment for the latter? 
The apostles suffered much in the cause of Christ — even 
Universalists admit this — that the apostles suffered — that 
is, those of them that pretend to believe the Bible ; though 
two distinguished individuals among them,it is well known, 
have lately given up all belief in the Bible and a God, be- 
come avowed Atheists, and open followers of that perni- 
cious and abandoned woman, who is spreading the poison 
of her Atheism through the country." The canting tone in 
which you uttered the last part of the above sentence was 
evidently designed to give your hearers the impression that 
Universalism naturally leads to Atheism. I am glad, how- 
ever, that you mentioned the subject in this manner, be- 
cause you give me a suitable opportunity of makinsf a 

19 



218 



LETtERS TO REV. D. Cr LANSING, D. I?. 



remark, from which I hope yon and the public may reap 
some benefit. The remark is this : The two individuals 
10 whom you alluded, (for no one can be at a loss to know 
who they were,) were loth CaJvinists — brought tip and 
educated thus, and became members of Calvinistic church- 
es — before they professed to be Universalists : and not only 
so, the very woman to whom you allude, and her god-father. 
Mr. Owen, and the trio in her atheistical editorial and pub- 
lishing establishment, were brought up and educated Cal- 
vi7iists, after the straightest sect," and went directly^ 
from Calvinism to Atheism — never even professing to be 
Universalists. Sir, does Calvinism naturally lead to Athe- 
ism ? The leaders of Atheism, in this country, went from 
Calvinism to their present system, and succeeded in draw- 
ing along with them two who were lately professed Uni- 
versalists. But, Sir, we could very well spare them ; for 
one is now in his dotage, having been of no use to us for 
a long time, and the other was never of much service^ 
having doubtless had his brain shattered, or mind disor- 
dered, by the monstrosities of your creed, while he was a 
member of a Presbyterian church, from occasional symp- 
toms of which derangement be has never since been free. 

But to your argument. We grant the apostles suffered 
much outward calamity in their labors in the cause of 
Christ. They " both labored and suffered reproach, be- 
cause ihey trusted in the living God, w^ho is the Saviour 
of all men, especially of those who believe." 1 Tim. iv : 
10. But then, they enjoyed a source of peace and happi- 
ness w^hich the world did not generally enjoy. Christ said 
. to them, " peace I leave with 3^ou ; m}^ peace I give unto 
you : not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not 
your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid. In the 
world ye shall have tribulation ; but in me ye shall have 
peace." And so it was : hence, St. Paul says, " we which 
have believed do enter into rest." 

But how is it with the wicked ? How was it with those 
wicked that David described, to whom you referred your 
^ hearers '? Why, you pronounced them blest and happy in 

this world, far more so than the righteous — far more so 
than the apostles and other pious and godly people. And 
to prove it, you read almost the whole of Ps. Ixxiii, and 
requested your hearers, when they went home, to read it 



LETTEUS 1:0 REV. C. LANSINO, D. D. 219 



over again, and also Ps. xxxvii. After reading the above 
Scriptures of David, you observed, that " it would seem 
as if the question must he forever settled, whether Univer- 
salisrn were true, or not" — that '* David had seen the pros- 
perity of the wicked, in this world, whose eyes stood out 
with fatness and had murnriured because of their happi- 
ness — until he was permitted to look into futurity — till he 
cast his prophetic vision to the eternal scene, the future 
judgment — and there saw the sword of divine wrath up- 
lifted, and beheld the dread vengeance of the Almighty 
prepared to be poured out upon them with eternal fury I — 
and this prospect checked his murmuring and stilled his 
complaints against the dealings of Providence with men 
in this world." These were the ideas you expressed, 
though not in every respect your exact words. 

But, Sir, what do those Psalms state about the eternal 
loorld? What information do they give us about a judg- 
ment, and endless misery, in another state of being 1 Just 
nothing at all. There is not a syllable said about a judg- 
ment or punishment in any state of being but the present 
much less is there aught said about the doctrine of endless 
misery, which it was your business to prove by Scripture 
testimony. Had these Psalms even proved the doctrine of 
future punishment, they would have been nothing to your 
purpose, in opposing Universalism, unless they had proved 
that punishment to be endless. But let any person unbi- 
assed by tradition or prejudice, read those Psalms through- 
out attentively, and he will not find a syllable to support 
your gloomy hypothesis. He will find that David, in Ps. 
xxxvii, exhorts to " trust in the Lord and do good," and 
not to repine at the temporary and outward prosperity of 
the wicked; for they would soon be visited with some 
severe judgment or sore calamities — that they would be 
taken in the very snares they set for the poor and needy— 
chat their swords should return into their own hearts, and 
their bows should be broken — whereas the righteous should 
inherit the earth''' — the Lord should " uphold them with 
his hand" — they should not be " forsaken, nor their seed 

* By ihifi expression, the author of the letters would by no means 
wish to be understood as opposing the idea of a future disciplinary and 
limited punishment ; but as indicating his conviction tbat the particu- 
Sajr Scripture in question related only to this state of being. 



220 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. I>. 



be left to beg bread." Does this, Sir, look like your eter- 
nal hell and heaven 1 

In Ps. Ixxiii, he treats of the same subject, with this dif- 
ference only, that he mentions the foolish cogitations that 
occupied his mind, when looking only at the outward and 
momentary prosperity of the wicked, without taking into 
view what his observation and experience afterwards taught 
him must soon be their fate. These cogitations appear to 
have been the same as the present opinion of Dr. Lansing 
is, viz. that in this life, taken altogether, the v/icked enjoy 
far more happiness than the righteous do. But recollect, 
the Psalmist afterward condemned this opinion as entirely 
false. He says, " so foolish was I and ignorant ; I was as 
a beast before thee." And, Sir, do you still harbor a sen- 
timent that the Psalmist pronounced /ooZM, ignorant and 
beastly ? But why was the sentiment foolish and errone- 
ous ? Because, David had seen so many signal displays 
of God^s righteous judgment against transgressors, had 
learned by the history of his own nation, the sudden over- 
throw with which the wicked had generally met, that the 
old world, Sodom, Gomorrah, Corah, &c., had been de- 
stroyed, that he was satisfied some calamity would soon 
visit those wicked people he had been fretting about. So 
certain was he of the fact, that he speaks of it as already 
accomplished : How are they brought into desolation, as 
in a moment ! they are utterly consumed with terrors." 
A man must certainly have a prolific and inventive ima- 
gination to conjure up an idea of endless damnation from 
such language. 

Sir, I have protracted my remarks on the above topics 
to so great a length, I shall not be able to finish in this let- 
ter what I have to say to you on the subject of your per- 
formance the evening I last heard you. You may there- 
fore expect to hear from me again soon. Should you 
become my enemy, because I tell you the truth, be assured 
I shall never be Yours. 

Utica, April 17, 1830. 



LETTER VI. 



Unequal distribution of rewards and punishvients. If 
present misery is compatible with the goodness of God^ 
lohy not endless ? Tivo characters set forth in the Bi- 
IIq — ^aith and repentance conditions of salvation — How 
can any one be redeemed from hell ? Where shall the 
ungodly appear ? Responsibility of ministers — Ezek. 
iii : 16-21 ; Mai. ii : 7, 8, 9. — Concluding admonition. 

Sir — I shall now proceed to examine the closing part of 
your harangue against Universalism, on the evening of the 
last Sunday in March. 

After you had proceeded to such a length in abusing 
Universalists, and misrepresenting their sentiments and 
the sentiments of the sacred writers, one would naturally 
suppose you had emptied yourself entirely of the gall and 
wormwood of your soul, without " foaming out your own 
sham.e" any more, by impugning the dispensations of Pro- 
vidence, or attempting to 

" Snatch from his hand tho balance and the rod, 
liejadge his justice, be the God of God.'* 

But it seems you had not quite " finished your course" in 
this kind of thing," though the closing part of your per- 
formance exhibited in general more modesty, and decency 
than your previous labors. 

"Look," said you, "to the many individual cases of 
crime, cognizable and not cognizable by law, thousands of 
which no human law can ever reach or punish, and which 
must of course go unpunished, at least, in this world" — 
(as much as to say, " there is no God that judgeth in the 
EARTH.") And you wished to know how such crimes 
were or could be punished, unless there was an endless 
hell for their perpetrators, hereafter. 

Sir, is it reasonable to conclude, because certain crimes 
are not cognizable by human laws, and because some sin- 
ners escape the outward punishment of these laws, that 
therefore these sins are without any penalty in this world, 
and that these sinners can suffer no punishment in time ? 
Does not the thief, the robber, the murderer, and every vile 



222 LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 



transgressor carry about constantly a hell within his own 
bosom that destroys all peace of mind — a canker that gnaws 
continually on the vitals of happiness — and is not the decla- 
ration verified in them, " There is no peace ^saith my God, 
to the wicked'' 1 Will nothing be allowed to constitute 
punishment but an endless hell of fire and brimstone? 
And \vhy did you not prove, by Scripture testimony, that 
such sinners would suffer endless punishment in hell? 
Answer — Because you could not prove it, either by reve- 
lation or reason. 

You proceeded, " It m.ay be urged that God does not feel 
as we do in relation to transgressors ; but I ask, does he 
delight in revelry and crime?" I answer, no, he does not 
delight in revelry and crime as such, but manifests his 
righteous disapprobation of them, by so constituting the 
laws of his moral government, that " the wicked atie like 
the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up 
mire and dirt." 

Again : you ask, " If it is compatible w^ith the goodness 
of God to inflict punishm^ent for sin in this world, is it im- 
possible for him to inflict punishm.ent in another world? 
Is it not equally compatible with his goodness to inflict it 
hereafter 1" 

Here, Sir, v/as a degree of sophistry in this question 
incompatible with honesty — you did not state fairly the 
ground of difference between you and your opponents — 
neither did your words express the meaning you evidently 
had in proposing the question. For if you meant any 
thing in opposition to Universalism, you evidently meant 
that, if it is consistent with the benevolence of God to in- 
flict temporal or limited punishment for sin, it is equally 
consistent with that benevolence to inflict eternal or un- 
limited punishment. This, 1 repeat, must have been your 
meaning, if you meant any thing in opposition to Univer- 
salism, I shall therefore proceed to answer this question by 
propounding another. 

If it is compatible with the character of a good earthly 
father to inflict a reasonable punishment on a disobedient 
child, is it not equally compatible for him to kill his child 
outright ? Or if it is consistent for a good earthly parent to 
chastise his child in proportion to his crimes, and for the 
purpose of subduing, amending, or bringing to obedience. 



LETTERS TO REV. B. C. LANSING, D. B. 



223 



is it not equally consistent for him to scourge his child 
every day of his life, keep him shut up in a dreary dun- 
geon, give him barely food enough to keep the breath of 
life in him, that he may endure torment, and thus set all 
his ingenuity to work to render his child as miserable as 
possible during his whole existence, without the least in- 
tention of doing him any good by this punishment ? This 
question must be answered in the affirmative, to give any 
support to your cruel doctrine of endless misery. 

" The Bible,'' said you, " represent^, throughout, two dis- 
tinct and different characters among men — the good and 
the bad, saints and sinners, sons of light and sons of dark- 
ness — to one or the other of these classes all men must 
belong, for Christ said, he that is not for me is against me." 
True, Sir, but do you find an infinite difference between 
any two individuals of the human family ? The very best 
are not infinitely good, but all are subject to imperfections 
and faults ; and the very worst are not infinitely evil, but 
all possess some good qualities. By what fair mode of 
reasoning, then, do you conclude an difference will 

be made in their endless condition 1 Again, these different 
characters you mentioned, have been, and often are, both 
sustained by the same persons at different periods of their 
lives. Take for example the persecuting Saul of Tarsus — 
he was once the chief of sinners, a bad man, a son of dark- 
ness ; but by the grace of God he became a saint, a good 
man, a son of light. Now, Sir, if the grace of God 
wrought such a change in this vile wretch, are you au- 
thorized to limit the arm of the Holy One of Israel, and 
say he cannot and will not effect an equally salutary change 
in all sinners ? 

Again, the Bible says the qualifications for heaven are 
faith and repentance. If all shall finally repent and be- 
lieve, I shall not be the last to rejoice in their salvation." 
Well, Sir, if the repentance, faith and salvation of all is 
desirable, and would be to you a subject of rejoicing, can 
you ever participate fulness of joy till this desirable event 
is accomplished'? (though I shall leave you to reconcile 
this declaration with a former statement of yours, that you 
would " rather go down to the dark and miserable sewer 
of the Atheist — to blank annihilation — than to admit the 
views of Universalists.") 



224 LETTERS TO REV. D. LANSING, D. B. 



" But," said you, " to declare with the Universalists, that 
all shall be saved at all events, and then interpose the Bi- 
ble conditions of faith and repentance, is most astonish- 
ingly and grossly absurd." And, Sir, is there not as much 
absurdity in declaring, v^ith the Calvinists, that " God did, 
from all eternity, elect some to everlasting life" — their num- 
ber being " so certain and definite that it could not be either 
increased or diminished," and these " shall be saved at all 
events," and then interposing the Bible conditions of faith 
and repentance 1 Is Jthere more absurdity in supposing all 
men will be saved on these conditions than there is in sup- 
posing " the elect will be saved" ? As an illustration of 
the views of Universalists, relative to the certain salvation 
of all, and the interposition of the conditions of faith and 
repentance, I will cite you to the case of Paul and the 
ship's crew with him on his way to Rome. You will re- 
collect, that when they seemed to be beset with dangers 
on every hand, and the crew were almost in despair, Paul 
told them positively, there shall be no loss of any man's 
life among you — there shall not a hair fall from the head 
of any of you." Yet, when some of the shipmen were 
about to flee out of the ship, he told them, " except these 
abide in the ship ye cannot be saved." Now, Paul was 
certain that none of the crew would perish, and equally 
certain that except these abode in the ship they could not 
be saved. What then is the inference? Why, that the 
condition of salvation would be complied with. So we 
maintain, that all men will be saved : and with equal con- 
fidence do we believe that all will finally be brought to 
yield to the conditions of repentance and faith. 

Here you anticipated another difficulty. " How many," 
said you, " die in sin — drunkards, liars, robbers, pirates, 
murderers — first perhaps murdering and then committing 
suicide ! How are they to be saved 1 Where and when 
will they repent 1 It will be too late when the day of retri- 
bution shall come — when they shall call on the rocks and 
mountains to fall on them and hide them from the wrath 
of their ofTended Judge — none can then repent — none can 
ever be redeemed from the flames of hell," &:c. 

Answer. This strain of declamation perhaps would pass 
for evidence or argument, with some traditionated and 
superficial orthodox people, who had never heard any 



L£TtE6S TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 225 



preaching but that like your own, and who had never al- 
lowed themselves to reflect or examine for themselves ; but 
it will not and cannot satisfy rational and enlightened 
minds of the correctness of your proposition. For, 1. It 
was assertion and declamation without argument or evi^ 
dence. 2. There was an entire irrelevancy, to your sub- 
ject, of the passage of Scripture referred to. The passage 
in Revelation relative to the rocks and mountains falling 
on those sinners mentioned, has no more relation to a fu* 
ture world, than the ancient predictions of the Babylonian 
captivity had : as any one will perceive by reading the con- 
text. And 3. Your declarations were opposed to particu- 
lar passages and to the general tenor of Scripture. 

As it respects those vile characters you named, if it is 
possible for God to bring such to repentance and save them 
in this world, is it not equally possible for him to do it in 
another? Are they not equally subjects of his moral 
government, and under his control, there, as here? then 
as now? Is his arm there shortened that it cannot save? 
or is his nature changed from benevolence to hatred by 
their removal from this to another state of being? In re- 
spect to the time when, and place where, they will be 
brought to repentance and reconciliation, I am satisfied to 
leave this with God, and in the language of the Bible, be- 
lieve " that in the dispensation of the fulness of times, 
he will gather together (or rehead, restore) in one all things 
in Christ, whether things in heaven or things in earth" — 
that he " hath spoken of the times of the restitution of 
ALL THINGS, by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the 
world began" — that " all nations v/hom he has made shall 
come and worship before him, and shall glorify his name*' — 
that " all the ends of the world shall remember and turn 
unto the Lord, and all the kindreds of the nations shall 
worship before him" — that " every knee shall bow and 
every tongue confess, that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the 
glory of God the Father" — and " no man can say he is 
Lord but by the Holy Spirit" — that " as in Adam all die, 
even so in Christ (not out of Christ) shall all be made 
alive," and " he that is in Christ is a new creature" — that 
whereas it is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorrup- 
tion : it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory : it is sown 
in weakness, it is raised in power : it is sown a natural body, 



226 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. t). 



it is raised a spiritual body. As we have borne the image 
of the earthly, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly." 

Your assertion that none ever were, or can be redeemed 
from hell, was equally false and anti-scriptural, with man}' 
other statements you made. David says, (Ps. Ixxxvi : 13,) 
" I will praise thee, O Lord, with all my heart, and I will 
glorify thy name for evermore. For great is thy m.ercy 
towards me ; and thou has delivered my soul from the lov/- 
est hell." Perhaps you will say David was delivered from 
going to hell, instead of being delivered from hell itself. 
But recollect, he says, (Ps. cxvi : 3,) "the pains of hell 
gat hold upon me:" so that David actually went to hell 
and was delivered from its pains. And Jonah says, (chap, 
ii :) " out of the belly of hell, cried I, and thou heardest 
ray voice — the earth with her bars was about me forever ; 
yet hast thou brought up my life from corruption, O, Lord 
my God." Hence, we find that Jonah went to hell and suf- 
fered there foreve'r, and yet, was afterwards delivered or re- 
deemed from it. And, Sir, do we not read that " death and 
hell delivered up the dead that were in them" ? How then 
can you assert that none can ever be delivered from hell ? 

About the last question you proposed that evening, wor- 
thy of notice, was this — " Where shall the sinners appear 
when Christ delivers up the kingdom to his Father !" 

Answer. " Then cometh the end, when he shall have 
delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father, when 
he shall have put down all rule, and all authority and 
power. For he must reign till he hath put all enemies 
under his feet. Death, the last enemy, shall be destroy- 
ed. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when 
he saith, All things are put under him ; it is manifest that 
he is excepted which did put all things under him." [Here 
observe, the Father is the only being excepted, that is not 
put under him — of course, all other beings must be sub- 
dued unto him in the same sense that any are.] " And 
when all things are subdued unto him, then shall the Son 
also himself be subject unto him that put all things under 
him, that God may be all in all." Now, Sir, tell me 
where is your endless hell, and the sinners that are to in- 
herit it? Is God in hell and its subjects, and they in him ? 
He must be in hell and in the sinner, and they in him, if 
hell and the sinner still exist, and God is all in all. 



LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSIl^JG, D. 227 



In concliisiori, you told your congregation, again and 
again, how very conscientious you were in doing up this 
work," (of preaching against Universalism,) for the great 
day of accounts, and doing it faithfully" — how ardently 
you desired to deliver souls from the awful hell that await- 
ed them — [what a pity that God has not as much benevo- 
lence for souls as yoit have !] — how that the peculiar cir- 
cumstances of the present time (the alarming prevalence 
of Universalism) 'had led you to do the work now — that 
you wanted to say a great deal more on the subject than 
you had said ; but you apprehended some of your hearers 
began to grow somewhat weary of the subject, having con- 
tinued this course of lectures now for thirteen weeks in 
succession — [There was more truth too, than poetry, in 
this hint.] But to justify your course in having said thus 
much, you read Ezek. iii : 16-21, as applicable to your 
case. But what has this passage (which relates to the 
commission of Ezekiel to the house of Israel) to do with 
a Calvinistic preacher in the present day ? or what has it 
to do with the preaching of endless misery ? Just nothing 
at all. Yet the exposition you gave of it, implied that you 
really supposed the blood of immortal souls would be re- 
quired at your hands, if you did not thus preach against 
Universalism. Sir, does the passage say any thing about 
the blood of immortal souls ? No. Does it say any thing 
about people being exposed to suffer endless misery? No. 
Suppose, through your neglect to warn your hearers of 
the dangerous tendency of Universalism, some one should 
die in this belief, and go to hell — would you have to go to 
hell also, as the penalty of your neglect? Yes, of course, 
if your exposition was correct. Then the neglect of 07ie 
would be punished with the endless damnation of tivo, 
would it not ? Again, suppose your neglect should cause 
the endless damnation of tioenty souls — would you not 
(allowing your exposition correct) have to suffer tioenty 
eternities of misery ! or twenty infinities of 'punishment ! 

Though I believe the station of a real Gospel niinister 
is a highly responsible station, and that every true minis- 
ter of Christ does, and necessarily must feel himself re- 
sponsible for the manner in vA^hich he discharges the duties 
of his calling, yet I do think. Dr. Lansing, that you advan- 
ced the most palpable absurdities in commenting on the 



228 LETTERS TO REV. D. C. LANSING, D. D. 



above passage from Ezekiel. And when a man so often 
repeats, and reiterates, times without number, declarations 
of his own extraordinary honesty^ it can have no other ten- 
dency ultimately, but to cause reflecting people to think he 
is no more honest than he should be ; as if a man should 
run through the streets telling every body he saw that he 
was no thief ^ and should repeat it from house to house, 
every day for a long time, that he never stole any thing in 
his life^ it would naturally tend to fix suspicion, and induce 
people to keep their goods out of his reach. 

I apprehend the following text would have been much 
more appropriate and suitable to your case than the one 
above mentioned : — For the priests^ lips should keep know- 
ledge^ and they should seek the law at his mouth : for he is 
the messenger of the Lord of hosts. But ye are departed 
out of the way ; ye have caused many to stumble at the 
law ; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the 
Lord of hosts. Therefore have I also made you contempti- 
ble and base before all the people y according as ye have not 
kept my ways, but have been PARTIAL in the law." — 
Mal. ii: 7-9. 

T have now done with your lecture on the evening I last 
heard you. In closing this letter I will offer a few words 
of advice. In your preaching, be more modest in your 
pretensions to superior authority and sanctity — more cha- 
ritable towards those who may differ from you in opinion- 
less dogmatical in your assertions — less presumptuous in 
sentencing your neighbors to hell, who may possess as good 
or better hearts than yourself — more studious of preaching 
the simple, uncorrupted doctrines of the Bible, than of per- 
verting particular texts and torturing them into an alleged 
support of your sectarian dogmas. In your intercourse in 
society, pretend to less, and practice more true religion — 
instead of creeping into houses for the purpose of terrify- 
ing weak-minded women and children with the fear that 
they are going directly to hell unless they join your party ^ 
visit the fatherless and widow for the purpose of affording 
needed relief or consolation. When I can see you prac- 
tising according to this advice, I shall think you are in a 
hopeful way for conversion. 

Yours as ever, D. Skinner. 

Vtica, May 1, 1830. 



